All those fancy new techs are expensive and wont really be fully gone into until the current tech dries up at 1.4nm
-
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.
So now that all the new Ryzens are here how many cores do we actually need in 2020?
- Thread starter Brazo
- Start date
All those fancy new techs are expensive and wont really be fully gone into until the current tech dries up at 1.4nm
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 1,194
I always thought that was the case but then if you come to think about it, ps3 had a beast of an 8 core processor and that was 2007. Fair enough it was a hard processor to develop for and not x86 tech but still back then remember what we had on the pc market, q6600 was released and the first mainstream quad cores that would start us on a rollercoaster of 4 cores on the mainstream market for years to come.
Roll on ps4 and now also xbox one, 8 core processors (2x4 cores i think though not certain) and some resourses occupied by the os constantly. So they are out there for years now. Of course the new zen2 custom chips will be hugely better than the jaguar chips the current gen consoles have and that will give a bump in processing power to the new consoles.
I think 8 will eventually become the new 4 core standard minimum good amount of cores to have, but that 3600 and 3600x if you find cheap is a really good cpu to start with, and as you said a few years down the line slam in there a 8, 12 or 16 core 4000 series beast for cheap.
Anywho i am glad we got more cores on the mainstream market, that means developers will try to utilise even more processing cores for their apps.
Soldato
No need for core count to change for the next generation from what we I have in my opinion.
Come AM5 and 5nm I can see core count then increasing again though. With it going 8,12,16,24 in total from Ryzen 3 to Ryzen 9 series.
Come AM5 and 5nm I can see core count then increasing again though. With it going 8,12,16,24 in total from Ryzen 3 to Ryzen 9 series.
Soldato
Eleventy hundred.
As others have said, I'd say you should target around 8 cores for gaming due to the new consoles using 8 Zen 2 cores - we'll likely see better multicore utilisation in games going forwards because of that. That said, personally I'd aim for something like 10 or 12 cores to have some extra free resources even if a game is fully utilising 8 cores as I end up multitasking while gaming all the time.
For regular desktop use you're probably still totally fine with fewer cores, though I'd only go as low as 4 at this point. For professional use go look at benchmarks for whatever software you use - there's a good chance it will scale well beyond 8 cores but what price point makes sense for you IDK.
For regular desktop use you're probably still totally fine with fewer cores, though I'd only go as low as 4 at this point. For professional use go look at benchmarks for whatever software you use - there's a good chance it will scale well beyond 8 cores but what price point makes sense for you IDK.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Id want a few cores to make me a cup if tea while im gaming too,
Am guessing most PC users would be fine with having just a single core or dual core cpu
I remember when I had my first dual core cpu (AMD Athlon x2 44400+ Dual Core ) back in about 2006 and just about nothing ever used the second core
Last edited:
Soldato
It all depends the use and is down to each person. Just until 2 1/2 years ago anything over 4 cores was "niche".
2 1/2 years later due to the extra CPU power at affordable price, more and more people find things to do.
So you need to define "most desktop consumer" needs.
Is their needs like my ex-father in law just write a document and send emails? If so, his 15y old system does the job, using Windows Vista also.
Hell their phone can do it fine.
Is it the need to create videos, rendering, transform music and so on. Depends how much time costs you.
Is it gaming? New consoles going to have 8 core Zen2 based CPUs, so all games going to be optimized for spreading to 8 cores minimum.
We already see that 4 & 6 core cpus are biting the dust. Companies also start looking to use CPU instead of GPU solution to Ray Tracing, making it hardware agnostic. (War Thunder and WoT are prime examples and many others follow). And is cheaper to buy a 9900K/3700X/3900X/3950X than a RTX2080Ti for this purpose. Also more cores allow developers improved their engines. Have a visit at Egosoft forums of experience people moved from 7700K to 3700X/3900X.
Or how the background simulator is really impressive, where "bigger" names like Elite Dangerous, EVE Online and Star Citizen cannot hold the candle to X4.
That needs a lot of CPU power. My 3900X stretches his legs on my current campaign (48+ hours), utilizing 10 cores at 60-100%. And the game supports 16 core CPUs.
So "most desktop consumer" is very vague term and depends the needs of each individual.
Soldato
You need as many cores as you can get. Let your OS do its thing, let your security software do its thing, feed the monsters that are Chrome and Firefox and still have cores left over to get on with your actual tasks, whatever they may be.
Soldato
Run two three games at the same time
I do that when starting the PC. Setting ESO, ES Legends and WOT at the same time. Type password in ESO and while waiting to log me in, getting in ES Legends collecting the daily rewards, then back to ESO, pick the daily & email. Close both and by that time WOT which has pretty slow login process these days due to server, is waiting
Set up a video/music running on the background and off I go. If I do need to render something on Fusion 360, restrict Fusion to CCD1 do it's thing, while playing WOT without problem on CCD0
Thats why I am eyeing a 3960X when start my new contract next month
Caporegime
My plan.
Caporegime
When it comes to gaming, I always think people get way too focused on the CPU. The only question should be, will the CPU hold my GPU back or not. And in the vast majority of games the answer is almost always no.
If for instance you have a RX 570, the current best bang for your buck graphics card, there are very very few games that will perform any differently on an i3 9100 than it does on a i9 9900ks or a 3950x. And while the number of games that want more than 4 threads is growing its still a tiny minority, and even then they tend to cap out once you get past 6 threads.
For all the people saying that it will come with optimization, while that is definitely true, its also a bit of a smoke screen, if your game runs perfectly on 6 threads, why bother optimizing for 8 or 12.
Most home users don't need anything more powerful than a pentium or current gen athlon with their 2 cores and 4 threads. If the most challenging thing your PC does is show a youtube video or spreadsheet for your monthly budget you don't actually need any thing above the low end. Most offices won't bother with anything above an old 4 core i5.
Realistically there are only a very few people who actually need high end stuff. But the people who can use high end multi core CPUs will always need as many cores and as much speed as they can get. And the better the high end stuff is and the more competition there is, the cheaper the low end stuff is. Compared to a couple years ago the 2 core 4thread home user CPU, the 4 core office CPU and the 6 core gaming CPU have all halved in price. So I say bring on as many cores and threads as possible because it saves the rest of us money
If for instance you have a RX 570, the current best bang for your buck graphics card, there are very very few games that will perform any differently on an i3 9100 than it does on a i9 9900ks or a 3950x. And while the number of games that want more than 4 threads is growing its still a tiny minority, and even then they tend to cap out once you get past 6 threads.
For all the people saying that it will come with optimization, while that is definitely true, its also a bit of a smoke screen, if your game runs perfectly on 6 threads, why bother optimizing for 8 or 12.
Most home users don't need anything more powerful than a pentium or current gen athlon with their 2 cores and 4 threads. If the most challenging thing your PC does is show a youtube video or spreadsheet for your monthly budget you don't actually need any thing above the low end. Most offices won't bother with anything above an old 4 core i5.
Realistically there are only a very few people who actually need high end stuff. But the people who can use high end multi core CPUs will always need as many cores and as much speed as they can get. And the better the high end stuff is and the more competition there is, the cheaper the low end stuff is. Compared to a couple years ago the 2 core 4thread home user CPU, the 4 core office CPU and the 6 core gaming CPU have all halved in price. So I say bring on as many cores and threads as possible because it saves the rest of us money