Games that like more cores
- Thread starter DzOnIxD
- Start date
Solution
synphul
Champion
- Mar 11, 2011
- 9,477
- 7
- 54,965
To my knowledge, none. I know amd 8 core owners are still waiting for it to happen (and have been for years now) but it just doesn't seem to be happening. Even with mantle. Things like mantle and dx12 are designed to be more efficient (improving overhead for existing cpu's) rather than requiring massive core counts far as I know. What gives better performance is individual core performance. Whether or not future games will push for more cores is nothing more than speculation and guesswork (and often flawed) until it actually happens.
Eggz
Distinguished
- Sep 3, 2013
- 2,052
- 1
- 20,460
Ha, we all would!
Having more cores will help ensure that a game runs more smoothly, even if the average FPS is the same on an 8 vs 4 core cpu. Here's a video on that.
[video="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GgDZKGA89I"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GgDZKGA89I[/video]
But the only way to tell is either find reviews of core utilization online or else test the games yourself.
For some games that are very poorly threaded, which overload one few cores without even addressing idle cores, the 4 core 4970k would actually outperform the 8 core 5960x. Each core in the 5960x is a little slower even after overclocking, so a game like that would run slightly slower. The good news is that most games aren't that bad, and even the bad ones only suffer from it during limited contexts during gameplay (i.e. really intense scenes).
I know that Boarderlands 1, 2, and the Pre-Sequal are very poorly threaded, whereas games on the CryEngine (e.g. Crysis 3, Evolve, etc.) and both Far Cry 3 and 4 spread work pretty evenly across many cores.
Also, when people say all you "need" is a quad core i5 for gaming, they aren't technically wrong, but it's a qualified statement. You'll be able to run most things on an i5, but you'll have to close other programs in the background, and it still might not be as smooth as an i7 in demanding titles. As for going higher than that, it's really a luxery that helps in a small percentage of demanding games at high settings. X79 and X99 are really for workstations and high-end gaming configurations. That said, I'd recommend getting the best chip and platform you can afford.
Having more cores will help ensure that a game runs more smoothly, even if the average FPS is the same on an 8 vs 4 core cpu. Here's a video on that.
[video="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GgDZKGA89I"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GgDZKGA89I[/video]
But the only way to tell is either find reviews of core utilization online or else test the games yourself.
For some games that are very poorly threaded, which overload one few cores without even addressing idle cores, the 4 core 4970k would actually outperform the 8 core 5960x. Each core in the 5960x is a little slower even after overclocking, so a game like that would run slightly slower. The good news is that most games aren't that bad, and even the bad ones only suffer from it during limited contexts during gameplay (i.e. really intense scenes).
I know that Boarderlands 1, 2, and the Pre-Sequal are very poorly threaded, whereas games on the CryEngine (e.g. Crysis 3, Evolve, etc.) and both Far Cry 3 and 4 spread work pretty evenly across many cores.
Also, when people say all you "need" is a quad core i5 for gaming, they aren't technically wrong, but it's a qualified statement. You'll be able to run most things on an i5, but you'll have to close other programs in the background, and it still might not be as smooth as an i7 in demanding titles. As for going higher than that, it's really a luxery that helps in a small percentage of demanding games at high settings. X79 and X99 are really for workstations and high-end gaming configurations. That said, I'd recommend getting the best chip and platform you can afford.
Calculagator
Admirable
- Nov 18, 2014
- 2,508
- 1
- 8,960
This is actually a difficult question. It is difficult to compare CPUs that only differ in core counts.
For intel CPU's, the difference between 4 and 8 cores is less important than clock speed. You can see a comparison if the i7-4770k (4 cores) and the i7-5960X (8 cores) here:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1317?vs=836
None of these tests show any real difference. The only place where you would start to notice a difference would be possibly if you had two or more top-end gpus running in SLI/Crossfire.
For AMD, things look a little different. AMD cores come in pairs: An 8-core AMD only has 4 modules making it more like a 4 core Intel cpu in some ways.
Here is a comparison of the FX 4350 and 8350, both running at 4.0 GHz.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1273?vs=697
Again, you can see that there are only slight differences in gaming benchmarks.
Part of the reason for this is that the CPU intensive parts of games are difficult to benchmark. CPU power is important for multi-player, but it is nearly impossible to compare multiplayer performance because there are so many other variables. Everyone who buys a faster CPU will almost always think that things run faster because of the placebo effect whether there is actually a difference or not.
Dragon Age Inquisition does show a benefit to the 8350 over the 4350 when running at low resolutions, though it is still matched or beat by the quad-core i7.
Probably the greatest advantage an 8 core cpu has is in its ability to run multiple programs at the same time. Games really only use up to 4 cores fully, but if you have a program running, it may tie up one or two of those cores leaving less than the optimal 4 cores available for gaming.
For intel CPU's, the difference between 4 and 8 cores is less important than clock speed. You can see a comparison if the i7-4770k (4 cores) and the i7-5960X (8 cores) here:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1317?vs=836
None of these tests show any real difference. The only place where you would start to notice a difference would be possibly if you had two or more top-end gpus running in SLI/Crossfire.
For AMD, things look a little different. AMD cores come in pairs: An 8-core AMD only has 4 modules making it more like a 4 core Intel cpu in some ways.
Here is a comparison of the FX 4350 and 8350, both running at 4.0 GHz.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1273?vs=697
Again, you can see that there are only slight differences in gaming benchmarks.
Part of the reason for this is that the CPU intensive parts of games are difficult to benchmark. CPU power is important for multi-player, but it is nearly impossible to compare multiplayer performance because there are so many other variables. Everyone who buys a faster CPU will almost always think that things run faster because of the placebo effect whether there is actually a difference or not.
Dragon Age Inquisition does show a benefit to the 8350 over the 4350 when running at low resolutions, though it is still matched or beat by the quad-core i7.
Probably the greatest advantage an 8 core cpu has is in its ability to run multiple programs at the same time. Games really only use up to 4 cores fully, but if you have a program running, it may tie up one or two of those cores leaving less than the optimal 4 cores available for gaming.
Eggz
Distinguished
- Sep 3, 2013
- 2,052
- 1
- 20,460
If you're considering getting the 4690k, I would strongly consider the Xeon 1231v3: http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Xeon-E3-1231V3-threads-LGA1150/dp/B00KASFWKK
It's not much more expensive and is the same as the i7-4970k no overclocked, but it just doesn't have on board graphics. If you get a GPU, then that doesn't matter anyway. The 1231v3 is hyperthreaded just like the i7, and it can also do other nerdy stuff in case you ever wanted to play with that. It's probably the best multi-threaded quad core for non-overclockers.
It's not much more expensive and is the same as the i7-4970k no overclocked, but it just doesn't have on board graphics. If you get a GPU, then that doesn't matter anyway. The 1231v3 is hyperthreaded just like the i7, and it can also do other nerdy stuff in case you ever wanted to play with that. It's probably the best multi-threaded quad core for non-overclockers.
synphul
Champion
- Mar 11, 2011
- 9,477
- 7
- 54,965
Don't intel cpu's tend to have less issue with fps drops than the amd's? Even with more cores, the amd's in bench's I've seen look like they suffer more frame drops than quad intels.
The 1231v3 xeon can be a solution if you run other heavily threaded programs but the games themselves don't gain much if any performance from it. It's similar to the 4790k i7 in that it has the same 8mb of cache and hyperthreading. Otherwise it lacks the igpu and it's clocked at 3.4ghz locked where the 4790k is clocked at 4ghz and is unlocked. It's really no more like an i7 than i5, the i5, xeon and i7 are all different from one another.
The 1231v3 xeon can be a solution if you run other heavily threaded programs but the games themselves don't gain much if any performance from it. It's similar to the 4790k i7 in that it has the same 8mb of cache and hyperthreading. Otherwise it lacks the igpu and it's clocked at 3.4ghz locked where the 4790k is clocked at 4ghz and is unlocked. It's really no more like an i7 than i5, the i5, xeon and i7 are all different from one another.
Eggz
Distinguished
- Sep 3, 2013
- 2,052
- 1
- 20,460
Yeah, the 1231v3 is basically a 4970 with a slightly slower clock speed, but it's similar in price to the 4960k, which is an i5. It doesn't matter if you lack funds, though.
The more relevant questions are what resolution will you run and which graphics card do you plan to buy (or how much can you spend on one if you don't know which you'll buy)?
The more relevant questions are what resolution will you run and which graphics card do you plan to buy (or how much can you spend on one if you don't know which you'll buy)?
Eggz
Distinguished
- Sep 3, 2013
- 2,052
- 1
- 20,460
Cool, you can actually get one for only $209 at Microcenter if you're near one:
http://www.microcenter.com/product/442355/Xeon_E3_1231V3_35GHz_LGA_1150_Boxed_Processor
Otherwise, get the best i5 you can afford. That will be a great little build
http://www.microcenter.com/product/442355/Xeon_E3_1231V3_35GHz_LGA_1150_Boxed_Processor
Otherwise, get the best i5 you can afford. That will be a great little build
WhiteSnake91
Distinguished
- Jun 16, 2013
- 1,431
- 2
- 19,665
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116906&cm_re=xeon_1230v3-_-19-116-906-_-Product
I don't think 40 more dollars for a 100mhz improvement is worth it for the 1231v3....the regular 1230v3 is still good.
I'd go i5 and z97 motherboard though honestly. There's no time soon a strong haswell i5 quad core will suddenly not be good enough for games, hell people still game on the first gen i5s and i7s.
Both consoles have 8 core amd apu's although they're clocked low, and 2 out of the 6 cores are for the OS. So games are running off the 6 cores remaining and it has 8gb of shared ram. XB1 having a 7790, and ps4 having an ~hd7850-7870 gpu in it.
in other words, most games being console ports are going to be dumbed down for the weaker consoles no matter if we like it or not. The i5 will run cooler and consume less power if that matters to you. And if that matters, consider going nvidia too, that r9 290 guzzles power. I was thinking of getting one until I saw how much it uses. If you're getting the 8350 and r9 290 you'll need a really good (and expensive) power supply....and you'll need a good motherboard.
So don't think AMD will instantly be cheaper, with what you need to consider with a bigger power supply and better motherboard so it won't throttle, AMD can actually end up costing more than Intel, without taking the electricity bill into consideration. That's a thing I think most people skimp over or choose to ignore, how much power is the 8350 and r9 290 going to guzzle? Even more when overclocked too >_>
I've seen people put together little overclockable 6300 6 core rigs which end up costing more than an i5 setup would of cost.
AMD cores are way less strong and the CPU's consume alot more power.
I don't think 40 more dollars for a 100mhz improvement is worth it for the 1231v3....the regular 1230v3 is still good.
I'd go i5 and z97 motherboard though honestly. There's no time soon a strong haswell i5 quad core will suddenly not be good enough for games, hell people still game on the first gen i5s and i7s.
Both consoles have 8 core amd apu's although they're clocked low, and 2 out of the 6 cores are for the OS. So games are running off the 6 cores remaining and it has 8gb of shared ram. XB1 having a 7790, and ps4 having an ~hd7850-7870 gpu in it.
in other words, most games being console ports are going to be dumbed down for the weaker consoles no matter if we like it or not. The i5 will run cooler and consume less power if that matters to you. And if that matters, consider going nvidia too, that r9 290 guzzles power. I was thinking of getting one until I saw how much it uses. If you're getting the 8350 and r9 290 you'll need a really good (and expensive) power supply....and you'll need a good motherboard.
So don't think AMD will instantly be cheaper, with what you need to consider with a bigger power supply and better motherboard so it won't throttle, AMD can actually end up costing more than Intel, without taking the electricity bill into consideration. That's a thing I think most people skimp over or choose to ignore, how much power is the 8350 and r9 290 going to guzzle? Even more when overclocked too >_>
I've seen people put together little overclockable 6300 6 core rigs which end up costing more than an i5 setup would of cost.
AMD cores are way less strong and the CPU's consume alot more power.
WhiteSnake91
Distinguished
- Jun 16, 2013
- 1,431
- 2
- 19,665
Yeah I mean that's what I've come to conclude too. AMD will game perfectly fine, I'm just thinking long term trying to save on my power bill, and with the added expenses AMD can cost more than an i5 setup.
Even going with an i5 4460 and h97 would last you many years, or even i5 4440 and h81 motherboard would be good for many years.
I don't really buy into the whole thing of "having" to get z97/h97 to "upgrade" to broadwell, that's a niche thing to do and I bet it's another measly ~7% improvement.
CPU improvements have largely stagnated since sandy bridge anyway. If you still wanted a strong CPU on more of a budget, locked sandy bridge i5s go cheap on ebay, pair that with like an h61 motherboard and that's still stronger than an AMD.
I say all that having a Phenom x6 pc sitting right here, it games fine, but with the dual monitor problems with AMD GPU having to crank the clocks way up and the AMD not being very power efficient at all, I'm seriously going to look into selling it soon when I get over this cold/flu. It plays BF4 multiplayer fine on ultra, high 40s to 60 fps...my monitor is only 60hz anyway so I use vsync.
For the price of an i5 and h97 you could get a xeon 1230v3 and an h81 motherboard, the Xeon will age VERY well due to having the 8 threads. There's still people gaming fine on the much weaker old i7 920s,etc.
Trying to find the smallest micro atx case atm and then I'm selling the Phenom x6 pc and even downgrading to a 750ti, it's no slouch and can play stuff on tweaked ultra or high settings on 1080p.
750ti playing BF4 multiplayer even with the taxing MSAA turned on...FPS would be much better with it off, I even turn it off on my stronger GPU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL6iN-DUJCw
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116906&cm_re=1230v3-_-19-116-906-_-Product
with
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130731&cm_re=h81_motherboard-_-13-130-731-_-Product
and 8gb of ram, and you'll be good to go for MANY years, and have something very power efficient. Also consider the 750ti, it's no slouch. Very good for not using much power.
Even going with an i5 4460 and h97 would last you many years, or even i5 4440 and h81 motherboard would be good for many years.
I don't really buy into the whole thing of "having" to get z97/h97 to "upgrade" to broadwell, that's a niche thing to do and I bet it's another measly ~7% improvement.
CPU improvements have largely stagnated since sandy bridge anyway. If you still wanted a strong CPU on more of a budget, locked sandy bridge i5s go cheap on ebay, pair that with like an h61 motherboard and that's still stronger than an AMD.
I say all that having a Phenom x6 pc sitting right here, it games fine, but with the dual monitor problems with AMD GPU having to crank the clocks way up and the AMD not being very power efficient at all, I'm seriously going to look into selling it soon when I get over this cold/flu. It plays BF4 multiplayer fine on ultra, high 40s to 60 fps...my monitor is only 60hz anyway so I use vsync.
For the price of an i5 and h97 you could get a xeon 1230v3 and an h81 motherboard, the Xeon will age VERY well due to having the 8 threads. There's still people gaming fine on the much weaker old i7 920s,etc.
Trying to find the smallest micro atx case atm and then I'm selling the Phenom x6 pc and even downgrading to a 750ti, it's no slouch and can play stuff on tweaked ultra or high settings on 1080p.
750ti playing BF4 multiplayer even with the taxing MSAA turned on...FPS would be much better with it off, I even turn it off on my stronger GPU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL6iN-DUJCw
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116906&cm_re=1230v3-_-19-116-906-_-Product
with
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130731&cm_re=h81_motherboard-_-13-130-731-_-Product
and 8gb of ram, and you'll be good to go for MANY years, and have something very power efficient. Also consider the 750ti, it's no slouch. Very good for not using much power.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Question Can I use a 6-pin molex to sata power adapter to power a 3.5" hard drive?
- Started by RagingFred
- Replies: 4
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram