Why dual cores will still own quads in games

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/S [...] ,8461.html

Epic Games' chief executive officer Tim Sweeney recently spoke during the keynote presentation of the High Performance Graphics 2009 conference, saying that it is "dramatically" more expensive for developers to create software that relies on GPGPU (general purpose computing on graphics processing units) than those programs created for CPUs.

He thus provides an example, saying that it costs "X" amount of money to develop an efficient single-threaded algorithm for CPUs. To develop a multithreaded version, it will cost double the amount; three times the amount to develop for the Cell/PlayStation 3

this is by far one of my biggest arguments that has been floating around for a looong time now and constantly dismissed as garbage. well - guess what? i was right q6600 fanboys.

get a quad for gaming is STILL useless ->

games are not multithreaded for the most parts - and the ones that are see little to no advantage from the additional cores. even games like gta4 run like crap on quad cores. supreme commanders shows little difference on my computer vs. my friends q6600. what is the point?

by purchasing a quad now for gaming now - you will get owned by future 6-8 core processors that will be introduced with REAL multithreaded games. 4 vs 8 core cpu for REAL multithreaded gaming in the future - which do you want?

now one thing the quad fanboys will constantly shove down your throat is the fact that quads are more 'future proof'. while this may be true - it is masking the real fact -> quads are STILL useless now. by the time they become efficient in any respect, there will be 6-8 core cpus that will draw less power and have a higher IPC.

please tell me quad core boys, what is the point of your purchases? only speculation as usual! companies WILL NOT PUT IN THE MONEY TO MAKE A MULTITHREADED GAME NOW WHEN THE MAJORITY OF COMPUTERS ARE NOT QUAD CORES! thank you kthx bye.

Hmmm, interesting take. I agree with the current situation thing, but arent we enthusiasts also?
Whos going to break ground for MT future usage if not us, that live on or close to the cutting edge?
When has the cutting edge ever been safe? I mean pocketbook wise?
Look deeper into what hes saying. Consoles make a greater customer for game devs nowadays, so thats where the monies at.
Console games are set for 3 cores max, thats why the huge tail off in perf, higher than we would normally see, as MT has its limitations.
As to the recommendations Ive seen here, just today I was defending the OP in his own thread about this very thing.
His pocketbook told him dual, alot of people were saying nothing but quad, and some had him switching mobo and a quad setup, which is obviously not what he wanted, asked, or even hinted at.
People will give their POV, which is fine, but if asked, that POV should take into consideration the OPs wishes.
As to the current scenario, same applies. Im not all gungho for quads hexes etc, but Im still an enthusiast.
In another thread, someones putting down the single threaded perf increase as being foolish because their particular usage requires MT.
Well, single threaded improvements would do more in the ling haul than any doubling of cores, as theres a limit to its effectiveness no matter what we do, whereas, make all those cores more efficient, it will perform better.
With all this, its no wonder I hate giving advice, as well as other things. It seems I always get caught up, in the middle of it all.
Im just glad we do have so many choices for so many usages we do today, unlike a few short years ago

Are you the boy who cried?, when his mom wouldnt buy you a quad.

And now 2 years later taking revenge!.. The cruelty when does it stop eh?

OH and why?.. BECAUSE I CAN

Somebody here is a real BS artist. I've already found quad core for gaming useful.

LOL. Hating because your mommy didnt buy you one.

You want to know what the funny thing about computers is? They can do more things then game, OMG I just taught you something you obviosly didnt know.

Try playing a game, burn a movie, download some torrents, and watching a movie, and scanning viruses on your dual core piece of crap, all at the same time and lets see how good your gaming experience is.

Also you dont even understand what the article is about.

Hes talking about what Nvidia would like the future to be. Nvidia claim it can do what a CPU does and do it better. This is the technology the article is about. Muli cores are and will be the future, devs will have to comply or get left behind by companies that do upgrade.

yes i also agree with daship, i believe gpu programming is the future, he should look into CUDA and tesla. maybe he will understand what the article is about =]

Great point by jaydeejohn which is that anyone that posts about a proposed build or upgrade or anything else read what the OP is looking for and not just inject their own wants and opinions into a thread. The point is to help a questioner get what they want, not force a build on them because it's what you want.

hahaha...all i can say is GTA IV

BTW: it isn't a game either

The thread name should be. Why dual cores will still own quads in some GAMES.

There are still several games that DO see a improvement. Epic is not the only company in the world.

For the price and everything else one can do with a computer, i think quad is the way to go for many people. But dual does get the job done(slower at some things) and save power

no, not crysis

The title of this thread doesn't reflect the OP accurately so it has been changed. Also, the news article doesn't even mention games.

Well, who wants a PC just only for gaming?

I own several dual core sets and a quad. among them, i always prefer the quad since it does more than gaming. Although i'm a game lover i also play with vegas pro 9, adobe after effects, and other video editing software which are cpu intensive stuff. a dual core will take ages for these to manipulate.

I think the greatest reason to buy a quad is the true multitasking abilities it could throw. It has greater room to run several programs concurrently and simultaneously. Game, surf, chat, convert music & videos etc.... using dual monitor display on a quad is pretty cool experience.

just my two cents.

ahh better

Try doing ray tracing on a dual core and then on an i7.

Because Intel will cannibalize its CPU market because LRB is going to make its future CPUs obsolete? Intel might as well shut down all CPU projects and just focus on LRB then. I should call Intel right now so I can save them billions!

lol, If Intel gives up on the CPU market, then AMD can be #1 again! Poor AMD...

By the time Intel gets everything they want to run on LRB, there wont be much left for a cpu to do, besides working in harmony with it, and itll become dependent, or theyll be co dependent on each other

Obviously not an overclocker...

lol man this thread should be locked up, and thrown away into deep space. This reminds me of when chevy used to make fun of toyota for introducing the Prius and now look what has happend..............hahaha actually looking at the title is making me laugh now ....lock?

I've had a 4.75Ghz E8500 and a 4.2Ghz I7 now. As much fun as the E8500 was. The I7 destroy's it in everything else besides games.

LOL

My single core San Diego will smash all of you. Who needs progress?!

ROFLMAO

Seems the OP got some original bad build information, thats unfortunate but does happen here a lot, users tend to point those in question, to the best for their money, I don't think any of them are trying to mislead, the original build suggestions and it seems to me thats what the OP was really upset about.

You posted earlier you renamed the thread to, "Why dual cores still own quads in games", maybe it should be, "Why dual cores still own quads in some games", as Flight Simulator X can and does take advantage of a quad core CPU and beyond.

lol i think the guy who started this thread was banned by toms hardware or left the country..........

He is affraid to arg's ....