• 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.

Games, how many cores do you need?

TrM said:
I would say a 3900x is minimum needed for gaming 16 core 3950x is even better:) Now i only say that becouse i have to justify myself buying the 3900x:)

but i do think though more cores will become the normal from a natural upgrade patch like i5 start of with 6 cores intel amd has 6 core 12 thread as there basde of mainstream cpus Now i know i3 and amd g cpus are lower but they really are budget cpu's and souldnt be paired with a 2070s/5700xt upwards now.


but currently ccore c count doesnt paint the whole picture clock speed is just as important currently Otherwise the 3900x would walk away from the 9900k and 3800x which is doesnt really. Future is really hard to tell atm with new consoles coming out with ryzen 2 cpu (proberly with much lowewr clockspeed) and xbox using direct x 12 the consoles really sould help multicore coding and engine optimiations on pc to use more cores and threads so if the ps5 and xbox 2 are both as powerful as they claim it really push the pc platform forward in using our pc parts to there maxuimum. i honestly think older i7 the 4 core 8 thread cpu will be outpased quickly i also think i5 6 core parts will also I think the 8700k and 3600 or maybe even the 2600x will last longer but i also have a sinking feeling they will start to struggle about 1 to 2 years after new consoles come out.

i think today people sould be looking at 3700x 3800x 9900k as there cpu with 3600 and 8700k being minium mainstream cpus and the 3900x is unique in the main stream just due to its core count but currently its behing the intel i9 in raw gaming power (only slightly) but there is still room to grow for the 3900x
Click to expand...

You can play two games at once :D
 
A 4 core should be enough but will be @100% or close to it so if you have anything else running you may get stuttering. An AMD 3600 will probably be the sweet spot for the next 2+ years(just gaming), anything above that will offer diminishing returns for most games.
 
humbug said:
I would, a 7700K is a 6700K with slightly higher clocks.

IMO, and this is just my opinion, you're good upto a 1080TI / RTX 2080, but that really is the limit before it starts to strangle GPU performance to the point where you wont benefit from a faster card.
Click to expand...

Yikes didn't realize how close to being bottleneck I was.
 
4 cores even with 8 threads gets too close to 100% usage in games now. 6 cores has room to breath and better minimum fps.

3600 is the minimum CPU imo for a 1080 ti, 2070 and higher. 2600 for anything else. ;)

No Intel chips to recommend. :D
 
So if four fast cores is still more than enough for gaming, how many years would you guess that my 3900 will last as long as I keep upgrading with modern GPU’s? I guessed 5 years minimum.
 
was this all tested at the same clock speeds ? if not then it seems a bit flawed
still wont get me to go amd, amd are the only cpu's that have ever blown on me
I am 2500k and rx470 not running in to any problems at 1080p what I would question is there aren't many must play games to even warrant an upgrade.The most played most fun games seem to not require 6 core +
 
For a new gaming/productivity build in 2019 I think its safe to say that a CPU with 6 cores and 12 threads is the sweet spot while those who uses heavily threaded applications should look at 8 cores and up.
 
C64 said:
was this all tested at the same clock speeds ? if not then it seems a bit flawed
still wont get me to go amd, amd are the only cpu's that have ever blown on me
I am 2500k and rx470 not running in to any problems at 1080p what I would question is there aren't many must play games to even warrant an upgrade.The most played most fun games seem to not require 6 core +
Click to expand...

So your debunking based on not a fair metric, I get that, but your closing statement is highly opinionated as your depiction of a 'fun game' can be anything and different to others..
 
having just upgraded from a 4790k to a 3900x i can say its worth every penny, the extra cores at my disposal make gaming much more enjoyable, ie can listen to music, have chome open in background while updating windows and have no stutter or anything.
 
humbug said:
You're right, i apologise for that.

I guess i'm talking about high refresh rates, 120Hz+, so 1080P
Click to expand...
Then I would say game dependant but more the merrier. It’s difficult to recommend less than six cores for an enthusiast build today but as ever it’s worth remembering that these forums are a microcosm and in no way reflect main stream gaming scenarios where people get by on two to four cores quite happily.
 
Brazo said:
Then I would say game dependant but more the merrier. It’s difficult to recommend less than six cores for an enthusiast build today but as ever it’s worth remembering that these forums are a microcosm and in no way reflect main stream gaming scenarios where people get by on two to four cores quite happily.
Click to expand...

It is game dependant but that doesn't necessarily mean the type of game you think it does.

I play a lot of older games and Indy games, with friend they are just much more fun than Battlefield.

i'll give you an example, Insurgency, 2014, built on Source Engine, same Engine as CS:GO but this game is more graphically involved, still a very high FPS game and my 4.5Ghz 4690K couldn't get on with it when using the GPU you see in my signature, hugely powerful GPU for that game.

As a result even at 4K it would lock the CPU to 100% whenever the draw distance was anything more than 50 feet, resulting in horrible micro-stutter, at 1440P or 1080P that was so bad it was unplayable, the Ryzen 1600 made that go away completely.

I made a recording of the problem here, as difficult as micro-stutter is to see, but you can see the CPU jump to 100% in places, watch the gun when loading, see it stutter.... that the most obvious visual thing of it.


And some times the difference is so high its not even funny.

6sR6qPL.png


B0KnK71.jpg
 
Last edited:
@humbug interesting stuff.
Where will this end though? Are we going to be sat in 5 years time debating how 16 cores isn't enough any more and that the "minimum" will be 32?

Can't help but feel the core race will reach a peak and then efficiency will come back round onto getting more processes on less cores and end up racing back down "to the bottom".

Would be strange if in 5 years we are all sat on single core machines laughing about how pathetic a multi core CPU is.
 
Steveocee said:
@humbug interesting stuff.
Where will this end though? Are we going to be sat in 5 years time debating how 16 cores isn't enough any more and that the "minimum" will be 32?

Can't help but feel the core race will reach a peak and then efficiency will come back round onto getting more processes on less cores and end up racing back down "to the bottom".

Would be strange if in 5 years we are all sat on single core machines laughing about how pathetic a multi core CPU is.
Click to expand...

I can't see this happening , the laws of physics means that's why we've gone onto multicore.
 
@Beasty Will do ^^^

Steveocee said:
@humbug interesting stuff.
Where will this end though? Are we going to be sat in 5 years time debating how 16 cores isn't enough any more and that the "minimum" will be 32?

Can't help but feel the core race will reach a peak and then efficiency will come back round onto getting more processes on less cores and end up racing back down "to the bottom".

Would be strange if in 5 years we are all sat on single core machines laughing about how pathetic a multi core CPU is.
Click to expand...

No, 6 cores 12 threads is fine right now, i think higher core counts will get increasingly applicable to games but it will take time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom