Games, how many cores do you need?

[humbug]

What is it about my Video that made you say that? @Brazo

 

[humbug]

Have games improved their utilisation of multiple cores now?

I remember when one very fast core was the answer for ArmA etc.

The Intel ST performance argument just doesn't hold water any more.

 

[humbug]

Ryzen 9 3900X 12 core 24 Thread: £530 https://www.overclockers.co.uk/amd-...hz-socket-am4-processor-retail-cp-3b5-am.html

Intel Core i9 7920X 12 Core 24 Thread: £999 https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte...ocket-lga2066-processor-retail-cp-63l-in.html

What's the problem with pricing on the 3900X? given also that the 3900X is pre core faster than the 7920X.

 

[humbug]

But LGA2066 platform is for workstations, it's HEDT, not MSDT as Ryzen 9 is.
The LGA2066 motherboards are better, too.

Better than X570? no.

Apart from Quad channel RAM what do you get on X299 that you don't get on X570?

SkylakeX is a workstation platform because it does MT Workstation work much faster than Z390, it has more cores, the 3900X is faster, way faster than the 7920X in those workloads, the 3900X is always out of stock because its in high demand.

 

[humbug]

Why would you think that selling only ~1,000-1,200 Ryzen 9 CPUs in July, represents "high" demand? 1200 out of 18,000 is only 6.66%?
6.66% of all the AMD CPUs sold during the same period ? ? ?

Its the 4'th highest selling CPU out of AMD's product stack, that's not bad, also, AMD sold more 3900X's than Intel sold 9900K's.

 

[humbug]

Great thread @humbug and I agree with what you're saying. In 2019, if you are looking to build a new PC and you're on a budget, the minimum you should be going for is 6 cores. Preferably from a chip thats no more than 2 years old.

As the next gen consoles get released, and they are said to have 8 cores, I believe that game developers will for sure start developing games that take into account all 8 cores and their full power. This will naturally trickle down to PC and 8 cores will pretty much be the standard. Of course a small indie game is not going to need that many cores, but the majority of major titles will.

If consoles have 8c/16t its only natural for a PC to have that as a minimum, and for the majority have more than 8 cores. Would not be surprised at all if within 3 years time that 12 core PC's were almost the standard and mainstream

Apparently Zen 2 cores, should be interesting.

 

[humbug]

I think the whole Jaguar CPU in that Console is weaker that just one of my cores.

 

[humbug]

Just spotted this:

Read the OP

****Snip****

His results.

BFV:
4 cores: 96 FPS
6 cores: 149 FPS
8 cores: 167 FPS
10 Cores: 173 FPS
12 cores: 174 FPS

Rainbow Six:
4 cores: 269 FPS
6 cores: 315 FPS
8 cores: 329 FPS
10 Cores: 334 FPS
12 cores: 337 FPS

Assassin's Creed Odyssey
4 cores: 62 FPS
6 cores: 87 FPS
8 cores: 109 FPS
10 Cores: 116 FPS
12 cores: 119 FPS

HITMAN 2
4 cores: 93 FPS
6 cores: 108 FPS
8 cores: 113 FPS
10 Cores: 116 FPS
12 cores: 119 FPS

The Witcher 3
4 cores: 101 FPS
6 cores: 137 FPS
8 cores: 151 FPS
10 Cores: 154 FPS
12 cores: 158 FPS

 

[humbug]

Well, some leaks in December 2018 made us believe that a upcoming revolutionary 7nm product lineup was coming up.
What we received in July 2019 is a mediocre performance refresh, at best.

To make matters worse, intel simply agrees, so AMD sells 70-80% of the DIY PC processors.
I don't think it's normal.

The big loser is every single PC user globally.

We get that you want 8 core 16 thread CPU's for £200 but what i don't get is why your focusing all your hate at AMD when Intel's CPU's are even more expensive.

 

[humbug]

It’s a comparison but hardly fair considering I’m guessing he’s just disabling cores.

Doesn’t factor in clock speeds etc such as a 6 core at 5.2ghz vs say a 4ghz 12 core.

High speed 6 core is still the sweet spot for a gaming pc and will still yield the best performance.

I’ve had a 4.9ghz 7920x (12 core) and didn’t end up with any extra gaming performance over it’s replaced 8087k at the same speed.

Hence me selling it and settling with a 9900k.

If you're comaring lets say a 6 core at 3.5Ghz and a 4 core at 5Ghz then it not a test of how many cores the game is using, its a test of which CPU is clocked higher.

 

[humbug]

I’m not saying 3.5ghz vs 5ghz as that would be unreasonable.

I’m just simply saying a 5+ghz 6/8 core will be better performing in games than a 10/12+ core just because they are known to not clock as well due to size, tdp, thermals etc.

And anyway if those 4 cores are better performing that those 6 due to being able to clock faster and thus perform better in games that kind of answers the question.

Do they? Give me an example of a low core count CPU in the same generation that is better than a higher core count CPU because the lower core count CPU has higher clocks.

 

[humbug]

Surely it’s game dependent. If it’s designed to be run on single core max clocks then it’s irrelevant having a cpu with a huge number of cores at a lower clock speed as most cores will be sat on their backsides doing nothing whilst the four (did I say four ) that are in use will be running slower.

I’m just about to upgrade to a 3900x so that must tell you which side my breads buttered, fact is though Intel does have an edge and imo that’s down to clockspeed and not core count.

I'm sorry i cannot resist...

Surely it’s game dependent. If it’s designed to be run on single core max clocks then it’s irrelevant having a cpu with a huge number of cores at a lower clock speed as most cores will be sat on their backsides doing nothing

True.

However.

fact is though Intel does have an edge and imo that’s down to clockspeed and not core count.

Surely it’s game dependent.

Right the first time ^^^^

Higher clock speed doesn't always = higher performance, there's IPC to take account of.

 

[humbug]

Not that that has anything to do with what I was talking about.

Fact is higher clocks still makes the most amount of difference as both sides ipc/architectural performance wise are still pretty close. 9900k at 5/5.2ghz vs 3900x at what 4.3ghz?

The 9900k still wins. Even stock-stock. Still wins.

multithread performance sure, gaming we are talking about here though.

You're using a metric that no one is arguing for, deliberately i suspect because even you know that a 5Ghz 8350K is not as fast as a 4.3Ghz Ryzen 3600.

Your whole argument is "it depends" well yes 8 core 16 threads vs 12 cores 24 threads is one of those dependencies which i have said my self, it doesn't make 6 cores being better than 4 any less true.

 

[humbug]

In the real world you wouldnt notice between intel or amd

No argument from me