• 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.

These guys have no idea what they are talking about.

I don't think they are entirely wrong looking at it objectively, but as Tim is so fond of saying "it depends" and it always does really. I have systems with a 5900X and a 5800X, I'll admit I really don't need 12 cores in my main system but I like to have them ...why not, I'm an enthusiast so I do, but speaking totally objectively I cannot really tell a difference in my typical use profile between the 5800X and the 5900X ...I don't have a 6 core chip to play around with at the moment but the last one I did have was a 3600 and although it was a while back I do remember that yes I could tell when I upgraded from that but honestly that was more about the IPC and clockspeed than the core count.

I don't think those guys are poopooing higher end hardware I think they are just saying that for gaming and running a few light background tasks, no you really don't 'need' 8 cores, that's not to say 8 cores aren't just nicer to have though for various reasons, I would be interested to see if frame times rather than frame rates and instances of hitching or stuter aren't better with the higher core count parts though, I strongly suspect that will be the case actually but that's also going to depend on what it is you are playing realy. But, in a scenario where someone has a strict buget and not a large one and you are looking at how you should divide your budget on a gaming system ....going heavy on the GPU and a bit lighter on the cpu is generally good advice I would say, but again ...it depends. If holding back on a 6 core CPU instead of an 8 core gets you upto the next tier of graphics cards, it's probably worth it for most people ...again aslong as we are in relative balance, so if you can go from a 3060 to a 3060TI ...very much worth it I would say, you will have a better gaming system for it generally.

Personally I always buy more than I need, I like having overpowered systems :D but I couldn't in good conscious advise others that is what they should do when they are trying to only spend what they need to, to get the experience they want. I would say people should overbuy a bit for sure, but it does depend on the budget and prevaling market conditions as much as what exactly their use case is and also how long the person thinks they are going to want to keep it for, if it's someone who likes to upgrade often (they probably don't need their advice to be honest!) then buy more with now in mind but if it's someone who likes to get 4 or 5 years or ...more even, out of their systems, then buy for the future as best you can.
 
Last edited:
Moeks said:
I don't think they are entirely wrong looking at it objectively, but as Tim is so fond of saying "it depends" and it always does really. I have systems with a 5900X and a 5800X, I'll admit I really don't need 12 cores in my main system but I like to have them ...why not, I'm an enthusiast so I do, but speaking totally objectively I cannot really tell a difference in my typical use profile between the 5800X and the 5900X ...I don't have a 6 core chip to play around with at the moment but the last one I did have was a 3600 and although it was a while back I do remember that yes I could tell when I upgraded from that but honestly that was more about the IPC and clockspeed than the core count.

I don't think those guys are poopooing higher end hardware I think they are just saying that for gaming and running a few light background tasks, no you really don't 'need' 8 cores, that's not to say 8 cores aren't just nicer to have though for various reasons, I would be interested to see if frame times rather than frame rates and instances of hitching or stuter aren't better with the higher core count parts though, I strongly suspect that will be the case actually but that's also going to depend on what it is you are playing realy. But, in a scenario where someone has a strict buget and not a large one and you are looking at how you should divide your budget on a gaming system ....going heavy on the GPU and a bit lighter on the cpu is generally good advice I would say, but again ...it depends. If holding back on a 6 core CPU instead of an 8 core gets you upto the next tier of graphics cards, it's probably worth it for most people ...again aslong as we are in relative balance, so if you can go from a 3060 to a 3060TI ...very much worth it I would say, you will have a better gaming system for it generally.

Personally I always buy more than I need, much more often times, I like having overpowered systems :D but I couldn't in good conscious advise others that is what they should do when they are trying to only spend what they need to, to get the experience they want. I would say people should overbuy a bit for sure, but it does depend on the budget and prevaling market conditions as much as what exactly their use case is.
Click to expand...

You started out by saying you didn't think they were wrong but ended up agreeing with me.
 
humbug said:
You started out by saying you didn't think they were wrong but ended up agreeing with me.
Click to expand...
No I really didn't, I feel that you oversimplified what was being said from your first post. Also I said that "I don't think they are entirely wrong" ....which implies I don't think you are either, you make a fair enough point, now I'm really not sure spotify or youtube is going to make enough difference to necessarily warrant spending an extra £100 on your CPU but I guess it will make 'some', I'd spend it but not for that reason, just because I can and I simply want more POWER! ..ahem.

What I did find myself agreeing with almost entirely from the video though was what Steve said about watching Youtube or doing other things while 'playing' games ...yea I think if the game is sufficently none-entertaining that you find you need other entertainment sources while you are playing it, it's probably not very good ....or it's an MMO and you are engaged in some reptative grind to get resources and I've been there and done that so much over the years, I have no time for it now and that type of game-play loop built into otherwise good games and will not engage in such activities because it wastes my time ...the game either fully enages me or it's really not worth my time. Having said that I can't listen to music and work though either, I have to focus on one thing at a time only I find it too distracting otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Moeks said:
No I really didn't, I feel that you oversimplified what was being said from your first post. Also I said that "I don't think they are entirely wrong" ....which implies I don't think you are either, you make a fair enough point, now I'm really not sure spotify or youtube is going to make enough difference to necessarily warrant spending an extra £100 on your CPU but I guess it will make 'some', I'd spend it but not for that reason, just because I can and I simply want more POWER! ..ahem.

What I did find myself agreeing with almost entirely from the video though was what Steve said about watching Youtube or doing other things while 'playing' games ...yea I think if the game is sufficently none-entertaining that you find you need other entertainment sources while you are playing it, it's probably not very good ....or it's an MMO and you are engaged in some reptative grind to get resources and I've been there and done that so much over the years, I have no time for it now and that type of game-play loop built into otherwise good games and will not engage in such activities because it wastes my time ...the game either fully enages me or it's really not worth my time. Having said that I can't listen to music and work though either, I have to focus on one thing at a time only I find it too distracting otherwise.
Click to expand...

That's one perspective, i do a lot of things while playing games, doesn't mean i'm not a serious gamer, that's imprinting on to others, the idea that because they are different they are wrong, that's one reason i likened it to Marxism, the idea that everyone is the same and if they are not they should be, its why all socialists turn out to be bigoted dictators, its also why the hard left build walls to keep people in. Here is another, if an 8 core can make a difference, no matter how small, then it is worth that extra whatever $ to the people who can afford it, its not for him to decide that.

Obviously i'm not being completely serious about this, but i do find his derogatory options about the people who disagree with him quite telling.
 
Well that point we do agree on yea, it did come over as a bit deregotary and it's not the first time I've heard similiar things said, as if not being 'hard core' makes you less of a gamer or less important or your needs less relevent, I get what you mean and I can see that it did come accross a bit like that yea, I used to think much like that once when I had all the hours of the day to play, now I don't I think I actually consider my gaming time more important as I appreicate it more by not doing it all day. I don't take them too seriously though they seem like a nice pair of guys and of all the hardware channels about now their's is probably my favourite all in all, but then I do have a bit of a monitor fetish so me and Tim would probably have a lot of talk about I imagine :D
 
Moeks said:
Well that point we do agree on yea, it did come over as a bit deregotary and it's not the first time I've heard similiar things said, as if not being 'hard core' makes you less of a gamer or less important or your needs less relevent, I get what you mean and I can see that it did come accross a bit like that yea, I don't take them too seriously though they seem like a nice pair if guys and of all the hardware channels about now their's is probably my favourite, but then I do have a bit of a monitor fetish so me and Tim would probably have a lot of talk about I imagine :D
Click to expand...

Perhaps i'm just getting old, i like tech journalists to be less opinionated, just give me the facts and i'll make up my own mind, i'm quite capable of that, i don't like being told what i should think, especially if its condescending, it feels like an attempt at manipulation, and that rubs me up the wrong way. Its always done with a smile and i too used to think of them as nice guys, until he started raging at people on twitter for something they had not said or done, like one of those lunatics constantly raging at people for not conforming to their world view.
 
humbug said:
Perhaps i'm just getting old, i like tech journalists to be less opinionated, just give me the facts and i'll make up my own mind, i'm quite capable of that, i don't like being told what i should think, especially if its condescending, it feels like an attempt at manipulation, and that rubs me up the wrong way. Its always done with a smile and i too used to think of them as nice guys, until he started raging at people on twitter for something they had not said or done, like one of those lunatics constantly raging at people for not conforming to their world view.
Click to expand...
No idea about that, I don't really use Twitter though. Interestingly the game I've played that pushed my system harder than any other and I think the only one I have played that has made proper use of my 32GB of ram is actually one you appear to be a fan of, Star Citizen, I'm more of an Elite Dangerous player still but I played SC a couple of times when they offered free weeks, I like it although not enough to take me away from ED still.
 
Moeks said:
No idea about that, I don't really use Twitter though. Interestingly the game I've played that pushed my system harder than any other and I think the only one I have played that has made proper use of my 32GB of ram is actually one you appear to be a fan of, Star Citizen, I'm more of an Elite Dangerous player still but I played SC a couple of times when they offered free weeks, I like it although not enough to take me away from ED still.
Click to expand...

I bought ED Horizons and Odyssey. i like them both.

Star Citizen does eat resources, its unplayable on anything but an SSD and even then its only smooth on a fast Nvme + 32GB of ram, GPU wise i have a 2070S and that's fine with the highest settings 1440P, CPU 5800X, quite good for it, a higher core count CPU than that doesn't matter to it.

Despite ED and SC being a similar sort of game they are very different, SC is multiplayer in the sense that you have complete unrestricted freedom in your own or other peoples multi-crew ship, this may seem like an insignificant difference but from a technical stand point its fundamental, you can't have instance loading with that level of unrestricted freedom, so there isn't any, you may have noticed in ED sometimes there is a short hang as you're entering the planets atmosphere, that's the game loading from the space instance to the planet instance, if you have people running around in the back of your ship what happens to them when you load in to a new instance? Well it can't happen, that's why Odyssey didn't get ship interiors, not because its "boring" clearly it isn't, its because they couldn't do it, at least not for there to be any point in having ship interiors like SC does.
SC use client and server side object container streaming.

There are many other complications like moving gravity, that's your ship interior again, that means movable and deformable physics grinds, EVA, well that's physics grids with in physics grids, i could go on, and on...... Star Citizen is, it has to be said a technical mind #### clustered!

All of that requires a lot of IO horsepower, and a good amount of CPU horsepower.
 
If you're interested in all this technical stuff, Digital Foundry did a good series on it, they explain it all far better than i ever could.

They are quite onld now and the game has moved beyond most of this, but its still very relevant, its what makes it what it is, so far, and some way still to go.....



 
Scougar said:
The reality is IMO 6c/12t is generally enough for the large proportion of people. Those multi-tasking may see some benefit of going 8c/16t or better.
Click to expand...
what sort of multitasking? word, excel, powerpoint, publisher and web browser open at once? modern dual core is enough for all that. maybe your mixing up multi-tasking with multithreading in things like blender and video encoding?
 
I would feel confident in saying that an I3 12100 would be a better general CPU than a first gen Ryzen for most people even today let alone the old pre-Ryzen junk ...and it was junk however many cores it had. The IPC of those 4 cores with HT is just so much higher it makes for a grim comparison for anyone hanging onto one of those older first gen chips. Now don't get me wrong ...I am not advocating quad cores anymore, no sir, not at all, but IPC and raw clockspeed do still matter a lot, what those cores can actually do is very important.
 
Cyber-Mav said:
what sort of multitasking? word, excel, powerpoint, publisher and web browser open at once? modern dual core is enough for all that. maybe your mixing up multi-tasking with multithreading in things like blender and video encoding?
Click to expand...

Was really referring to gaming plus other things at the same time. (I wasn't confusing the terms, but thank you )
 
sparkymark75 said:
Guys like these, do they even have an IT background? Some of them are just enthusiasts that like to talk so make a living out of it by monetising YouTube videos.
Click to expand...
I think they've both got a history reviewing PC hardware going back years. They're one of the better review channels. I'd trust them over a lot of the corporate IT press.
 
I'm in the camp of more cores = better. I'm still running my TR 3960x because half the time I'll have something like SSMS open running something with 20 browser tabs plus 4 spreadsheets etc etc and tbh I don't want to close any of it but still want epic performance when I fire up a game, therefore more cores is unquestionably better every single time. I'd take my 3960x over any mainstream cpu currently available.
 
Vince said:
I'm in the camp of more cores = better. I'm still running my TR 3960x because half the time I'll have something like SSMS open running something with 20 browser tabs plus 4 spreadsheets etc etc and tbh I don't want to close any of it but still want epic performance when I fire up a game, therefore more cores is unquestionably better every single time. I'd take my 3960x over any mainstream cpu currently available.
Click to expand...
Do me favor, can you tell me what your CPU usage is when you have 500 browser tabs and 4 spreadsheets? I assume it should be like, 2 to 5% depending on what else you have running on the background. Even a 6 or an 8 core can handle that just fine when gaming. I mean I have 11 tabs open right now, one of them being a youtube video (paused though) , torrents steam and battlenet, cpu usage is sitting at 2%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom