Caporegime
Quad cores are not good gaming CPU's, its not arguing ones potion its just spreading bad advice.
If you want good stable future proof gaming it has to be a 6 core.
Last edited:
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Why Benchmarking CPUs with the GTX 1080 Ti is NOT STUPID!
- Thread starter gavinh87
- Start date
Quad cores are not good gaming CPU's, its not arguing ones potion its just spreading bad advice.
If you want good stable future proof gaming it has to be a 6 core.
You just picked a bunch of worst case examples which is in all honesty just disingenuous. Even now in 2018 the VAST majority of games don't scale well past 2 cores, most cpus since sandy still make great gaming cpu's just not the best cpu's for gaming.
Soldato
With the explosion of core count over the past 18months, we will see acceleration of core utilisation by developers sooner than later.
When ? this has been an on going discussion for the last 8 years at least and every year its the same story, a handful of games that scale well yet most benefit more from the fastest single core performance.
Don't kid yourself that most developers will be switching to game engines that favour multiple threads any time soon.
Soldato
q6600 was launched back in 2007 - quadcore. It took 10 years, until 2017, for quadcore to be surpassed in mainstream desktop scenarios, by hex cores and above.
It took 1 year to move from hexcore to octacores to 16 cores and above, for mainstream desktop scenarios.
Developers WILL utilise more cores sooner than later.
Caporegime
No, that is pretty typical, its why i upgraded my 4690K.
You said Quad Cores are good gaming CPU's, clearly when pushed only half as fast as a mid range Ryzen 1 they are not good at all.
You're just wrong about Quad Cores and Gaming.
Last edited:
I agree, but by the time these 8 core cpus will be necessary. They will be far outdated by newer fast ones. We've got to start somewhere though.
If you build it they will come as the old saying goes so the more people replace their older CPU’s, the more programmers will optimize to take better advantage of more cores.
I know it takes time to develop new game engines but most gamers, including content creators and such are not buying 4 cores anymore.
It’s minimum 6 cores today and that is only going to accelerate as Intel and AMD releases their next gen CPU’s in 2019.
You don’t need 8 cores today as a gamer and you probably won’t need it in 2019 either but if you are upgrading soon, please don’t look at anything below 6 cores.
I know it takes time to develop new game engines but most gamers, including content creators and such are not buying 4 cores anymore.
It’s minimum 6 cores today and that is only going to accelerate as Intel and AMD releases their next gen CPU’s in 2019.
You don’t need 8 cores today as a gamer and you probably won’t need it in 2019 either but if you are upgrading soon, please don’t look at anything below 6 cores.
Caporegime
Agree but i would add that 4 core CPU's are fine for the very budget minded, anything more than a GTX 1050TI and you will have a pretty horrible experience, i had to run Insurgency, great game but how old is it? i had to run it 4K DSR to tame my GPU power balance because the 4.5Ghz 4690K could not keep up, and even then it was stuttery, anything less than 4K it was a _______ mess with all 4 cores permanently locked to 100%, it was like trying to play the game while running Cinebench in the background.
4 Cores are dead for anything above GTX 1050TI.
I was talking about the mainstream and up but I completely agree that buying a new 4 core CPU is still fine in budget oriented setups since those aren't users planning on running the latest games like Battlefield 5.
Last edited:
Caporegime
For YOU i'm sure its fine, it has not been for me, for others and plenty of reviews out there also show it really isn't fine.
You cannot ignore that screaming "but its ok for me, and everything else is balls" no, actually it doesn't work like that, your opinion isn't worth that much.
Just to point out, That's a 4 core 8 thread CPU you have not a straight 4 chip which is what's shown/referred to above
Caporegime
Yes, well the BF1 slide is a 7700K.
I was meaning the screen-shot of Insurgency mainly but bar BF1 the rest show 4 cores too
Caporegime
They do, you're right.
Caporegime
Associate
Sigh... I think you're missing my point here, I wasn't particularly saying quad core is great for gaming or anything similar. I was more saying to do a best decision at the time of buying based on currently available hardware, your particular usage/ game/ software, the resolution you run at and available budget whilst allowing for a modicum of future proofing (but don't think anyone has a crystal ball to look years into the future)... It's the sweeping statements saying this is bad or good I disagree with, there are way too many variables to be able to say that... Just ends up in a massive thread with lots of people disagreeing with each other in circular arguments...
Kinda like this really
Soldato
Reading back a little. The old chestnut of quad is fine etc.
I've got a rig here, Titan x (Maxwell) 32gb @2666 with a 5960x installed. If you want me to do some benches with a 5930k in the same rig I will. I've gotta good few games to choose from.
I've got a rig here, Titan x (Maxwell) 32gb @2666 with a 5960x installed. If you want me to do some benches with a 5930k in the same rig I will. I've gotta good few games to choose from.