CPU and online gaming

[ohyouknow]

I've been wondering something for a while now. Everywhere I look for CPU gaming evaluations either come from benchmarks for Single player mode or other offline programs. For good reason this is done since online gaming has way too many factors/variables that are uncontrollable and thus any testing procedures could not be replicable. Now I ask for those who have more knowledge on this subject, how much of a role does the CPU play in online gaming? Core count? Clock speed? Cache? Etc. I've heard things about having a higher core count is better, but not much more was explored in this matter. Thanks and cheers.

 

[amuffin]

Higher Clock Speed=More performance, this is for online playing.

 

[palladin9479]

I've been wondering something for a while now. Everywhere I look for CPU gaming evaluations either come from benchmarks for Single player mode or other offline programs. For good reason this is done since online gaming has way too many factors/variables that are uncontrollable and thus any testing procedures could not be replicable. Now I ask for those who have more knowledge on this subject, how much of a role does the CPU play in online gaming? Core count? Clock speed? Cache? Etc. I've heard things about having a higher core count is better, but not much more was explored in this matter. Thanks and cheers.

It's a big "it depends". Different games behave differently. Before the BF3 multiplayer benchmarks came out everyone just assumed that multiplayer = singleplayer for games. This has recently been disproved and unfortunately there are no other multiplayer games that have been benchmarked other then BF3. We can use BF3 as a good example, during single player games it rarely use's more then a single core, thus an i3-2100 bench's the same or near an i5-2500, 970 and 8150fx. During multiplayer the i3 will drop off dramatically as player count rise's while the i5 / 8150 and 970 keep going.

Basically go with four cores minimum, four real cores (BD counts as 0.75 each).

 

[con310]

It's a big "it depends". Different games behave differently. Before the BF3 multiplayer benchmarks came out everyone just assumed that multiplayer = singleplayer for games. This has recently been disproved and unfortunately there are no other multiplayer games that have been benchmarked other then BF3. We can use BF3 as a good example, during single player games it rarely use's more then a single core, thus an i3-2100 bench's the same or near an i5-2500, 970 and 8150fx. During multiplayer the i3 will drop off dramatically as player count rise's while the i5 / 8150 and 970 keep going.

Basically go with four cores minimum, four real cores (BD counts as 0.75 each).

That has proven to be false actually and the I3 will preform better then 970 in gaming and BF3 online,not the i5 tho.

 

[palladin9479]

That has proven to be false actually and the I3 will preform better then 970 in gaming and BF3 online,not the i5 tho.

Other way around. I3 starts dropping frames after 32 players, and has issues with 64 players. The solution was to trim down on the settings but that only helps so much. What starts happening is players start poping in and out of your screen. You get killed by someone before you've had a chance to see them.

 

[con310]

Other way around. I3 starts dropping frames after 32 players, and has issues with 64 players. The solution was to trim down on the settings but that only helps so much. What starts happening is players start poping in and out of your screen. You get killed by someone before you've had a chance to see them.

No it doesn't, maybe with a AMD970 but an i3 2100 or 2120 will easily do a 64 player server and is better then those other CPUs for gaming in general.

 

[palladin9479]

No it doesn't, maybe with a AMD970 but an i3 2100 or 2120 will easily do a 64 player server and is better then those other CPUs for gaming in general.

/sigh your one of those.
Shoo fly away.

 

[ohyouknow]

Best answer selected by ohyouknow.