What do you guys think about games that require 4 cores?

GTA4 is just bad optimization, no doubt.

BC2 has a ot of Dynamic physics processing though, aswell as a lot of procedural destruction. it rund well enough on a dual, but given how cheap you can get a quad for these days i think its no problem. in fact, i wish more games would push hardware this way, instead of all the ports than run on mid range hardware at max settings.

we are PC gamers 'cause we want the best. if you don't like the performance of a game, either upgrade your PC, or downgrade to a console.

I wish more games used quads too... and I mean really used them, for example seeing stuff we know is truly out of the league of any dual core.

Such examples would be A.I. in games that behave more like a real human would and excellent physics the likes of which we have never seen before, although it looks as though the GPU will be the physics king in the future. (eventually)

BFBC2 has good destruction physics, but that does not explain the low framerate on dual core machines when buildings aren't blowing up etc.

The Xbox 360's CPU is said to be outclassed by even a Pentium D yet it manages a steady framerate whereas some Core 2 Duo's do not, which to me is at least a hint of bad optimization.

yes like crysis warhead really uses or make good use of all available cores...boosting the fps....

I agree that AI should be the main focus of devs. but right now they are sticking with consoles and we will only see the improvements that can be easily ported.

when the next gen of consoles hits, im sure we will see some massive leaps in tech. unfortunately we are bound to the console chain. PC gamers have become the underclass.

Yes we are very bound by the consoles, we pretty much get their games with a resolution increase and less and less are letting us get exclusive graphic effects or settings.

Of course there are devs that put their heart and soul into the PC version but there are fewer and fewer of these today.

I agree that once the new batch of consoles come out PC games will get a MASSIVE boost in graphic quality and will take advantage of additional cores and GPU horsepower.

That being said I do own an Xbox 360 to play with friends and admit they are looking a bit dated today, it's a shame this console cycle will last so long (I hear the new batch is due out 2012) as this also holds back the progress of PC games.

I say it's a good thing. And of course it isn't too soon. The first quads avaliable for the public came out before 3-4 years, so games should've moved to quads sooner. Also, there is a nice amount of games that support quad cores, but still, most of the games make use of 2-3 cores. Some of the games that make good use of quads are Dragon Age Origins (massive boost in fps), BF Bad Company 2, GTA4, Crysis Warhead, Napoleon Total War, CoD MW2 and others.

I'm dissapointed that some new games like Starcraft 2 DON'T make use of at least 3 cores. New games that will come out in late 2010 and 2011 should run good on fast dual cores, but should give at least 60-75% boost on quad cores.

Hell, in late 2011 and in 2012 there should be games that will support hexa cores. The only game at the moment which is making a difference when using 6-core cpu is Napoleon Total War.

We pay 500+ for a graphic card to run a game, yet you can buy fast quad cores for under $200. Yeah, it's time for games to start taking advantage of multiple cores to get the job done, instead of just raw mhz from a single or even dual core processor.

I don't think alot of people REALLY buy those $500 video cards, only a handful of enthusiasts many of which go on forums like these so it may make it seem like more people have them then really do have them.

Food for thought, the midrange of video cards sells the most, and perhaps some people who stretch their budget to get even a midrange card can't also afford a $200 quad core. (remember folks, the economy is terrible).

Remember games are often developed for the lowest common denominator and if that's dual core it may be awhile before we see games really use quad cores.

I agree with proto, this has been discussed to death. People think every PC out there has an i7 & GTX 470. The truth is the exact opposite. Over 50% of "gaming" PCs on STEAM have a dual core still.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/?sort=pct

I think more games need to push 4 cores, quads have been on the market for over 4 years now. The adoption to dual cores went much quicker than the adoption to quads has, and we've got $100 quads now a days. Heck, while people have been buying expensive C2D processors they could have been buying Phenoms for the same or less. Consoles have 3+ cores, so why not make good use of that on the PC.

console CPU and desktop CPU are apples and oranges. what helped the adoption of dual core CPUs for computer gaming was the launch of the xbox360 and PS3. Companies want to maximize their profits so that translates to cross-platform games.

Yeah there are $100 quads, but one must think into the future, once games really start pushing quads, will those dinky 100 dollar quads have enough power?

Who knows.

For current $100 quad cores, i would say only about a year.

With bulldozer and Sandy Bridge coming around making quad cores possibly mainstream/value end, Maybe a $100 quad core will be enough. Although with out any performance data, i cant say for sure about that.

ya me too agree, cause i still have my 9400GT which is my first ever GPU.....
but i have a Quad core pair with it....  

Yeah. So does D.A. Origins, really pushes my q8200 to it's limits  

and gta 4 too........

Well i mentioned most of the games that make use of quads in my first post 

ohh i read ur first post yesterday so forgot that...lol..