CPU Longevity?

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 14:33

gavinh87 said:
Except it happens again towards the end......

Then you'd be disappointed.

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 14:34

gavinh87 said:
Is the benchmark for the redux the same as the standard? I only have redux......

I used the standard but can also try Redux

humbug · 21 May 2017 at 14:34

gavinh87 said:
Is the benchmark for the redux the same as the standard? I only have redux......

Its the same game but with updated textures, so yes, pretty much.

humbug · 21 May 2017 at 14:38

voidshatter said:
Then you'd be disappointed.

You must think us all stupid? he said toward the end, thats 0.5 seconds worth of the end. The last 25 frames, the fade to black.

gavinh87 · 21 May 2017 at 14:42

humbug said:
You must think us all stupid? he said toward the end, thats 0.5 seconds worth of the end. The last 25 frames, the fade to black.

Yep look at the actual graph provided by the benchmark. There is more than 1 moment where the game tanks.

humbug · 21 May 2017 at 14:43

gavinh87 said:
Yep look at the actual graph provided by the benchmark. There is more than 1 moment where the game tanks.

Right, he highlighted his own CPU bottleneck dips. I suspect without realising it.

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 14:47

humbug said:
You must think us all stupid? he said toward the end, thats 0.5 seconds worth of the end. The last 25 frames, the fade to black.

Gonna love the energy

humbug · 21 May 2017 at 14:49

voidshatter said:
Gonna love the energy

We can see that on the Graph, no point in highlighting it in Excel, i told you MLL picks up and scores frame hiccups, thats one, literally one frame, those long coaster dips 'you yourself highlighted' are not frame hiccups, they are CPU bottlenecks.

DragonQ · 21 May 2017 at 14:51

humbug said:
Its shared between the CPU and GPU, or at least it was, older PhysX games are broken on newer nVidia GPU's, like Pascal, Like it does with AMD it is running on the CPU.

Its the same on Borderlands 2, i also play MLL, trust me, with PhysX on the CPU gets overloaded, especially a 4 core.

Even with 12 threads Borderlands 2's PhysX brings my PC to its knees. I can imagine the single-figure FPS seen with Core i5s!

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 14:52

humbug said:
We can see that on the Graph, no point in highlighting it in Excel, i told you MLL picks up and scores frame hiccups, thats one, literally one frame, those long coaster dips are not frame hiccups, they are CPU bottlenecks.

Except that I can't see it in the graph. The graph is automatically plotted using this csv file. You probably want to accuse me manipulating the csv file next?

gavinh87 · 21 May 2017 at 14:52

Ok last light redux results. Not an apples to apples comparison so if void wants to post his redux results.....

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 14:54

Higher resolution version of the graph:

humbug · 21 May 2017 at 14:57

voidshatter said:
Except that I can't see it in the graph. The graph is automatically plotted using this csv file. You probably want to accuse me manipulating the csv file next?

Its here...

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 15:01

humbug said:
Its here...

Yeah, isn't it within the first five seconds?

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 15:06

gavinh87 said:
Ok last light redux results. Not an apples to apples comparison so if void wants to post his redux results.....

Didn't work out quite well with Redux:

humbug · 21 May 2017 at 15:10

voidshatter said:
Yeah, isn't it within the first five seconds?

Yes you can stop posting screencaps now...., its just a glitch, nothing to do with the performance of anything....

But those Roller Coaster dips, those are CPU bottlenecks.

Metro Last Light is perfect for testing the performance of the GPU and how well the CPU is able to feed the GPU, (Draw Calls) its also a very well threaded game.

Those areas where the CPU is put under a full load, those are the 'canyon shaped dips' on the graph, the Ryzen chip compared with the 6600K, at least, has a lot more compute threads and with that much higher performance to feed the GPU, that is what you are seeing in my screencap with 6600K @ 100 FPS and the Ryzen 1600 @ 160 FPS.

This does matter for longevity in gaming because it means the Ryzen 1600 is capable of driving much more powerful GPU's than the 6600K is in MLL and similarly optimised games, which is true for the future as they become better threaded.

You may have seen another screencap where the 8 compute threads on a 5Ghz 7700K in BF1 are completely saturated? do i need to post that again?

Its really simple, in the MLL case Intel have 100% IPC X4, the Ryzen Chip has 95% IPC x6 < excluding SMT, that is.

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 15:22

humbug said:
Yes you can stop posting screencaps now...., its just a glitch, nothing to do with the performance of anything....

But those Roller Coaster dips, those are CPU bottlenecks.

Metro Last Light is perfect for testing the performance of the GPU and how well the CPU is able to feed the GPU, (Draw Calls) its also a very well threaded game.

Those areas where the CPU is put under a full load, those are the 'canyon shaped dips' on the graph, the Ryzen chip compared with the 6600K, at least, has a lot more compute threads and with that much higher performance to feed the GPU, that is what you are seeing in my screencap with 6600K @ 100 FPS and the Ryzen 1600 @ 160 FPS.

This does matter for longevity in gaming because it means the Ryzen 1600 is capable of driving much more powerful GPU's than the 6600K is in MLL and similarly optimised games, which is true for the future as they become better threaded.

You may have seen another screencap where the 8 compute threads on a 5Ghz 7700K in BF1 are completely saturated? do i need to post that again?

You completely missed my point. I never disagreed that there are some games (and more games in the future) which can support more than 4 threads. If you like playing 720p low settings I'm fine with that. I'm only claiming that there exists no single GPU capable of doing 4k max settings at over 60 fps, not in the near future of the first generation Ryzens. I just showed that the 1080 (non-Ti) can do only 50 fps lower bound in the LL Redux benchmark, which translates to 12.5 fps for 4k. If each generation of GPU improves by 37% then it would take five generations after 1080 (or four generations after 1080 Ti) to reach 60 fps for the lower bound in the LL Redux benchmark. And yet 60 fps is still not CPU-bound. You'll need over 100 fps to see it to be CPU-bound, and that's gonna be 5.6 generations after 1080 Ti.

humbug · 21 May 2017 at 15:29

voidshatter said:
You completely missed my point. I never disagreed that there are some games (and more games in the future) which can support more than 4 threads. If you like playing 720p low settings I'm fine with that. I'm only claiming that there exists no single GPU capable of doing 4k max settings at over 60 fps, not in the near future of the first generation Ryzens. I just showed that the 1080 (non-Ti) can do only 50 fps lower bound in the LL Redux benchmark, which translates to 12.5 fps for 4k. If each generation of GPU improves by 37% then it would take five generations after 1080 (or four generations after 1080 Ti) to reach 60 fps for the lower bound in the LL Redux benchmark. And yet 60 fps is still not CPU-bound. You'll need over 100 fps to see it to be CPU-bound, and that's gonna be 5.6 generations after 1080 Ti.

Not at all, i have already addressed this, using low resolution and settings is a long time tried and tested way to highlight the CPU's performance in games, how well the CPU is able to feed the GPU with Draw Calls when the GPU is fast enough to Call Draws at a fast enough rate to stress the CPU.

This is my original response the first time you said this to me. different people using that account? make sure you keep track of what each of you have already been over.

humbug said:
Yes.... YES YES YES this is exactly the point, when you test a CPU's true performance in games you make the CPU Not the GPU work for it.

What do you think will happen when GPU's get faster, and faster and....? the CPU will have to work harder and harder to keep up, the way you test for that with weaker GPU, or one from today is to offload the work onto the CPU by turning the resolution down, it mimics the faster GPU making the CPU work hard to keep up.

The result is as that screenshot proves the Ryzen Chip with 50% more cores, 75% more threads is 60% faster than the i5 there.

So the better CPU for longevity is....??????? yes, its the Ryzen chip.

voidshatter · 21 May 2017 at 15:32

humbug said:
Not at all, i have already addressed this, using low resolution and settings is a long time tried and tested way to highlight the CPU's performance in games, how well the CPU is able to feed the GPU with Draw Calls when the GPU is fast enough to Call Draws at a fast enough rate to stress the CPU.

This is my original response the first time you said this to me. different people using that account? make sure you keep track of what each of you have already been over.

So you still don't get the analogy of "a beautiful girl in her best years without a man"? What about "a sexy boy in his most vigorous years without a girl"?

GAC · 21 May 2017 at 15:34

voidshatter said:
You completely missed my point. I never disagreed that there are some games (and more games in the future) which can support more than 4 threads. If you like playing 720p low settings I'm fine with that. I'm only claiming that there exists no single GPU capable of doing 4k max settings at over 60 fps, not in the near future of the first generation Ryzens. I just showed that the 1080 (non-Ti) can do only 50 fps lower bound in the LL Redux benchmark, which translates to 12.5 fps for 4k. If each generation of GPU improves by 37% then it would take five generations after 1080 (or four generations after 1080 Ti) to reach 60 fps for the lower bound in the LL Redux benchmark. And yet 60 fps is still not CPU-bound. You'll need over 100 fps to see it to be CPU-bound.

let me wade in, as someone on a 4 core 4 thread I5 750 from 2009, il be upgrading come august/september once coffee lake has shipped and we have a good set of sensible reviews, il be aiming for 8 cores/16 threads, not because il be able to use them now fully, but down the line they will become more and more useful. as for intel over amd, id rather go intel as iv had far less issues over the years with mobos and drivers than i have with amd. BUT if intel dont drop competitive prices il opt for amd but for now no one can say.

im not going to grab a 4c4/8t chip when i could get more cores just for a 5-10% ipc jump in the short term. especially when that 5-10% may vanish if you compared it against a 6c12t chip which could very well be cheaper. brand loyalty and buyers remorse is all well and good but end of the day we get the best we can afford thats on the market.