• 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.

INTEL BRING THE BIG GUNS!

Gibbo said:
Not really a CPU for gaming, to me they just seem like Xeons for desktop.

If your a gamer, 7700K or Ryzen 1600 to be honest at a fraction of the price. :)
Click to expand...

None of the offers with this many cores from AMD or Intel are in reality but it doesn't mean most people wouldn't like one.
 
6-8 cores is all you realistically need for gaming but there'll always people who will buy the best regardless of cost so why blame companies for offering them, the trouble with buying 12-16 cores now is that if there's any significant improvement in core performance they'll get left behind by processors with far fewer cores and you'll struggle to sell them on.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Every three years you can double transistor count, you can double gpu shader count potentially or you can double cpu core count. If you use that performance is entirely irrelevant to the statement that performance has improved. That lets say a 18 core 14nm chip can score likely 80% higher than a 10 core 22nm chip is fact, that you might not use all the available performance on the new chip is a completely different discussion.

You said you can't get extra performance every few years on CPUs like you can with gpus, but you absolutely can. You just might not have software that utilises that available performance.
Click to expand...
Yes but I'm talking real-world scenarios here, not theoretical performance, so it seems we agree. Like I said, having double the number of CPU cores doesn't help unless your application/game actually takes advantage of it, and the way a lot of applications are designed it simply isn't possible to scale infinitely with cores. GPUs are more specialised so most applications that use GPUs are heavily multithreaded and so take advantage of double the shaders, etc. without any extra effort on the developers' part.
 
james_2k said:
Not really that bothered anymore to be honest, but i saw your scores in the appropriate threads. looks like it responds well to the overclock!

as for me, latest cpu scores were 14588 for time spy and 29538 for firestrike
Click to expand...

Yeah, I only stuck a small OC on and pegged the voltage to try to stop it throttling. More oc'ing will have to wait until the waterblock arrives. Stable at 3600C16 mem though :-)
 
mmj_uk said:
6-8 cores is all you realistically need for gaming but there'll always people who will buy the best regardless of cost so why blame companies for offering them, the trouble with buying 12-16 cores now is that if there's any significant improvement in core performance they'll get left behind by processors with far fewer cores and you'll struggle to sell them on.
Click to expand...
This this and more this.
I've seen people buying TR specifically for gaming. Madness. Isn't an R7 actually faster in games? (assuming you will get a faster all core OC on R7)
 
beany_bot said:
This this and more this.
I've seen people buying TR specifically for gaming. Madness. Isn't an R7 actually faster in games? (assuming you will get a faster all core OC on R7)
Click to expand...

The 8 core TR (1900X?) looks interesting, its higher binned than the 1800X, has quad channel RAM and leaves you with oodles of room to upgrade in future. Going 12 or 16 core for gaming alone is daft at the moment. This will probably be the chip for me. Don't mind paying the premium for the extra expandability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom