I notice in alot of recent CPU benchmarks the amount the i3s out perform the Pentium G series seems to be widening compared to older games if this because games are now using the extra threads even hyperthreaded ones. The i7s seem to only outperform the i5s by roughly the amount the extra clock speed can account for. Would I be correct in thinking the games can use 4 threads real or not but above that not really? and maybe the i7 is good for future proofing aver the i5s. I am not buying anything just wanted the knowledge.
If you already have the knowledge, then why ask eh?
Yup that seems to be the case, games are starting to use more cores, although more slowly. That's the reason why modern dual cored Intel chips got knocked out by the ancient Athlon and Phenom II x4 chips in the $100 and below CPU segment (Toms hardware, Best gaming CPU's review, Feb 2013), because modern games like more cores
I also read that an FX 8350 performs slightly better than an i7-3770k in the latest Crysis3 game!!!
Now that both the PS4 and Xbox will have 8 weak cores, game developers will be forced to spread out across more cores, no matter how difficult that maybe. End result; significant advantage to AMD cpu's 2-3 years down the road.
For the most part you won't find many games that will get anything from hyper-threading. While there are few that may get a performance boost out of it in most cases they are going to be heavy multi-threading applications that would do better with a full core to run over the hyper-threading.
I think Hyperthreading mostly helps the dual core chips since more modern games can take advantage of 3-4 cores now and the i3's are 2 core, 4 thread chips. The benefit isn't there for the i7's because they already have 4 cores to begin with.
Recent benchmarks, however have shown that hyperthreading does help the core i3. Hence why the Athlon II X4 and Phenom II X4 are back on the list for best gaming CPU's for the money and the Pentium G's are off the list and the i3's remain.
it depends on the game but in most cases it reduces cpu performance per thread by anything from 2-25% which basically means an 8 threaded cpu will give the same gaming performance as a 6 core cpu that doesnt hyper thread.
on some games hyperthreading can decrease performance of the game if its badly optimized, as it will use 1 core and 2 threads instead of using 2 cores with 1 thread each.
running 2 threads off a single core means the cpu resources are shared and every time you share something you get less of it. but the amount will vary depending on what threading needs to be done. a well optimized engine will gain form threading while a badly written 1 wont.
crysis 3 likes hyperthreading cpu's it has been well optimized so will give good performance with the minimum of threading overheads.
next year we may see a step change in gaming where hyperthreaded cpu's will become beneficial in a way they previously werent. pretty much to the way console games will be programmed.
because the console cpu's will be running so slow (1.8ghz) they will have to use threading more effectively to get the higher workloads done so in theory the new ports will hopefully implement well optimized threading on the pc versions. as pc cpu's are genrally faster the likely hood will be we may not need an 8 core to get comparable or better performance. we should still be able to use a 4 core and still get more grunt than the consoles offer.
I think hyper-threading is a cool feature to have. In all CPUs, each core has its own execution engine. The execution engine controls the L"x" cache, and thread traffic (including returns and request). In a hyper-threaded core, the execution engine shares resources, and controls thread traffic independently for two logical processors. Hyper-threading has a great deal in common with a multi core processor; its usefulness depends on the operating system and the program that will use them. Most programs are simple and are only written to use one core. But some programs and games are very complex and demanding, and are written to fully utilize hyper-threading and/or any number of cores they have excess to. Windows 7 and 8 are very hyper-threading and multi core processor friendly, Vista XP 2000 and 98 support and manage this extra resource poorly. For Windows 7 and 8, I recommend the use of at least a 2 core processor. These operating systems manage 2 cores well; they free up one core by running background programs in the second core. If you have Windows 7 and 8 and run mostly simple programs, you will see little to no difference between a 2 core 3.2 gigahertz CPU, and an 8 core 3.2 gigahertz CPU. If you are a gamer or power user, you most likely will make good use of the extra cores/processors. The simple answer to your question is; the degree of benefit depends on how well your programs and the operating system are written to manage the extra resources.