It will be a lot more future proof than a lower core count chip, but 5 years is a long time.
To put that question in perspective it would be like comparing a Broadwell i7-5775C to a Ryzen 5900X
-
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.
6 Core vs 8 Core in gaming?
- Thread starter zirebnd
- Start date
- Status
It will be a lot more future proof than a lower core count chip, but 5 years is a long time.
To put that question in perspective it would be like comparing a Broadwell i7-5775C to a Ryzen 5900X
It's not an argument, it's how the PC gaming market works. There are many things that dictate how many cores a game developer will optimise for. Unfortunately for us, most of those things at present make optimising for over 6 cores a waste of time and money on their part. Do they spend time trying to make the game run great on 8+ core CPU's for a small subset of people? Or do they spend that time fixing bugs and polishing the game?
It's common sense, the proof is in the FPS charts and has been for years, and consoles are largely to blame for that. Alongside the slow uptake of 8+ core CPU's due to them being prohibitively expensive.
It almost impossible to throw a blanket statement out when discussing this topic as so many variables need to be considered, but to say games run on a couple of cores is inaccurate at best.
I never said nor implied they run on a couple of cores, that's rather specific lol... I can see why you got confused though, you assumed I was saying they cater to the lowest common denominator. That isn't what I was trying to imply at all.
My statements are backed up by facts, I have friends who work in the gaming industry. Just trying to share some insight as to why the 5600X is performing as well as it's big brothers, and why 6 cores will do you for many years to come if all you do is game. Bear in mind I say just game, if you stream or multi task whilst gaming then 8+ cores will definitely better suit you.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,358
- Location
- Planet Earth
People don't seem to appreciate how consoles use a lot of custom logic to offload processing,which the CPU in a gaming PC needs to handle. The PC needs to essentially brute force things as it needs to do simply more things than the console CPUs.
Moreover,the the new consoles have the biggest improvement in the CPU side for a decade,maybe even 15 years.
Devs will be more and more likely to really start utilising CPU processing power more for multi-platform games. ATM,those weak Atom class Jaguar cores means a lot of multiplatform games don't really utilise CPU resources that much. Simple things such as AI,etc are still using very old models from years ago because of this.
If you are really intending to keep a system for 5 years or something like that,one of the higher core count models would make more sense IMHO.
There is nothing wrong with a 6 core CPU for now,but I don't think they will have as much longevity as people think they will.
But at least with AM4 you have a good upgrade path,which means people have options later on.
Moreover,the the new consoles have the biggest improvement in the CPU side for a decade,maybe even 15 years.
Devs will be more and more likely to really start utilising CPU processing power more for multi-platform games. ATM,those weak Atom class Jaguar cores means a lot of multiplatform games don't really utilise CPU resources that much. Simple things such as AI,etc are still using very old models from years ago because of this.
If you are really intending to keep a system for 5 years or something like that,one of the higher core count models would make more sense IMHO.
There is nothing wrong with a 6 core CPU for now,but I don't think they will have as much longevity as people think they will.
But at least with AM4 you have a good upgrade path,which means people have options later on.
Last edited:
I wouldn't be so sure. Game devs are going to be making cross gen games for at least a few years, which means they'll optimise games around the weaker Jaguar CPU's. And as far as I'm aware, there is still a core reserved for the console OS. That may leave them 7 to play with, but realistically they'll optimise for 5-6 unless it's a PS5 exclusive.
You seem to have edited your post. But as I said you can’t throw out a blanket statement on the subject. It’s inaccurate at best
I only edited a wordYou seem to have edited your post. But as I said you can’t throw out a blanket statement on the subject. It’s inaccurate at best
The only variable I'm trying to make a statement on is how game devs optimise for CPU count. It may seem like a blanket statement, but it's not really. The limitations imposed by the previous generation of games consoles has shaped the tools many game developers use. Not to mention, there really aren't as many PC gamers out there with 8+ core CPU's, as there are with 4-6 core CPU's. Both of these factors influence how game developers optimise their game to run on an optimum CPU core count. The optimum at the moment is 6 cores, and in my personal opinion, we won't see that changing until game devs stop catering to old gen consoles, or until the next next gen consoles are released with more than 8 cores.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,358
- Location
- Planet Earth
If you look through some of the technical stuff WRT to them,there is a lot of custom stuff,which aims to reduce the load on the CPU,to free up resources. The OS overhead is lower too. What do you expect - a PC is a general purpose device,whereas a console is a device dedicated to do one or two things. You have to appreciate a PC needs to brute stuff more,with those six cores,you are running the OS,AV and various other stuff such as audio processing,etc. Most reviews are looking at very clean OS installs with nothing running in the background.
If you are the sort of person who upgrades every few years you might be able upgrade to more cores at the appropriate time. OTH,if you intend to be keeping the PC for sometime you realistically need to be looking for an 8C/12C CPU IMHO. Remember when only a few years ago people were saying a Core i5 7600K 4C/4T CPU was fine - is it really fine now?? Its moved from 4C/4T being a sweetspot to 6C/12T in two,maybe three years. That was with the previous generation of consoles.
I don't disagree, I'm really looking forward to what they do with the latest gen. Regarding stuff running in the background, that really isn't an issue nowadays if you have a decent AV and close Chrome when gaming. They only take up memory which isn't a real concern for most PC gamers. Remember, 4C/4T was the sweet spot back then because that's all most people had
6C/12T CPU's weren't mainstream yet. Consoles started off way ahead of the game in terms of CPU count, which meant games were always going to run better on 6 core CPU's, because the optimisations were already in place. Brute forcing doesn't change the fundamental amount of cores a game is optimised for, it just means it can't do its workloads as efficiently. I really do think 6 cores will be more than enough for PC gaming for quite some time. It's just not economical for most game developers to optimise for higher than that.The industry has change greatly and will continue to change. Games are now based mostly on engines and those are constantly adapting and being updated at great expense so baking in headroom is a must when you are looking to leverage the investment over the engines lifetime. Sony’s engine for deaths stranding for example scales well past 8 cores, yet the PlayStation can only run 8 threads. If you go back to 2012 mantle had support for 8 cores.
1. CPU's don't die, 99.99999999% will keep working long after they become relatively useless
2. Ironically, moving to 4k will mostly eliminate CPU bottlenecks, extending previous generations useful life even further
3. Sandy Bridge is still awesome
4. When buying a CPU, it's good practice to buy one with at least the same number of cores as the current console generation, so I wouldn't cheap out on a 6 core right now for a new build.
in hardaware unboxed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsfvRw74h30&t=264s
we see that 12 core is better in most games and higher fps from 5800x 8 core and 10900K,,,, in most games...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsfvRw74h30&t=264s
we see that 12 core is better in most games and higher fps from 5800x 8 core and 10900K,,,, in most games...
No, the PS5 does not use all 8 cores, it can use 7 at most as 1 is reserved for the OS. Most games are actually optimised for 6 cores, like all the benchmarks show.
No-one knows how long a 5600X will last for, but the chances are it will still be doing just fine in 4 years time when compared to its big brothers.
If you just game, 5600X is more than adequate. If you want to do anything else at the same time whilst gaming on the same computer, 5800X or higher.
I'm sorry for asking stupid question (I don't this, but my kids want to), but if anyone knows please reply...
For playing games at 1440p@165 with 3080 GPU and streaming, would 5600X (6 core be enough)? or would 5900X do much better job? I believe streaming is done off GPU, however I don't know how much OBS adds.
For playing games at 1440p@165 with 3080 GPU and streaming, would 5600X (6 core be enough)? or would 5900X do much better job? I believe streaming is done off GPU, however I don't know how much OBS adds.
I was thinking of buying second hand 12 or 16 core. ($300-$400 euros tops). In 3 - 4 years AM4 platform / DDR4 will be on its last legs, with AM5/Zen4+/Zen5 being the new hot toys. People will be selling zen3 cpus at a good discount.
do you believe that the cpu of ps5 is better from the 5600x and 5800x??
lol no, the 5600x is faster
- Status