Is that including or excluding HT/SMT. Like is 6 core 12 threads important or is just 6 cores 6 threads important? Likewise for 8 cores and 16 threads opposed to 8 cores and 9 threads?
-
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.
Will any high end games meaningfully benefit from more than 8 cores anytime in the near future?
- Thread starter Wolverine2349
- Start date
Is that including or excluding HT/SMT. Like is 6 core 12 threads important or is just 6 cores 6 threads important? Likewise for 8 cores and 16 threads opposed to 8 cores and 9 threads?
Also can someone explain why it is that hyper threading 4 core Intel Core i7 6700K and 7700K are somewhat ok still in many games last couple of years where as 4 core 4 thread 6600K and 7600K are much worse.
Does hyper threading and ST in genera make that much of a difference for games that started using more threads? Or was it the increased L3 cache that pulled them over the edge.
Cause non hyper threading 6 core CPUs were a little better than 4 core hyper threading i7 and non hyper threading 8 cores of course blow out 4 cores 8 threads. But yet the cutoff seems to be 4 cores 8 threads for any somewhat respectability where as 4 cores 4 threads have severe stuttering and almost unplayable or not playable at all in some of today's games??
Does the same hold true in the future for 8 core CPUs where 9900K will age much better than 9700K and such?? Or was that an anomaly with the 4 core 4 thread and 4 core 8 thread CPU situation??
Does hyper threading and ST in genera make that much of a difference for games that started using more threads? Or was it the increased L3 cache that pulled them over the edge.
Cause non hyper threading 6 core CPUs were a little better than 4 core hyper threading i7 and non hyper threading 8 cores of course blow out 4 cores 8 threads. But yet the cutoff seems to be 4 cores 8 threads for any somewhat respectability where as 4 cores 4 threads have severe stuttering and almost unplayable or not playable at all in some of today's games??
Does the same hold true in the future for 8 core CPUs where 9900K will age much better than 9700K and such?? Or was that an anomaly with the 4 core 4 thread and 4 core 8 thread CPU situation??
Man of Honour
6700K isn't really ok in the latest games though. I know because I had one which was OCd to 4.4GHz before I migrated the build to this 12700KF system. The 1% lows especially saw a massive uplift in that I could maintain a minimum of 60fps in games like Cyberpunk at 3440x1440 - Granted with RTX off as I had a 2070 Super at the time before getting the 3080 Ti.
You can't compare that gen 4 core to this gen 8 core because the fundamental application and architecture is generations ahead. Today's arch will likely far outlast the 6700k gen's 4 cores just because they're very good and efficient to boot.
You can't compare that gen 4 core to this gen 8 core because the fundamental application and architecture is generations ahead. Today's arch will likely far outlast the 6700k gen's 4 cores just because they're very good and efficient to boot.
I agree it is not ok in latest games. Just pointing out that it can kind of do it but with poor performance where as it seems the 4 core 4 thread parts have no chance. Maybe it is just extra L3 cache. Cause even the quad core 12100 is kind of ok in many games today.
And yeah in theory it would seem todays arch being so much better would outlast then. Though at the same time given the competition now between Intel and AMD, could that also be not true as things may advance faster.
Where as when Intel was on top, they kept us at quad cores on mainstream with 15-20% IPC improvements from Ivy Bridge through Skylake before stalling then making their 14nm tech able to do 8 core chips even on LGA 1151 with Skylake derivatives.
Though its hard to see core counts beyond 12 or 16 if even that for games. Not sure where progress is going to take us next. Like how much better can IPC and clock speeds really get using Silicon??
Man of Honour
True, I guess only time will tell. All I can say is that these 12th gen chips are pretty awesome at basically everything.
How would you say 6700K is compared to quad core Coffee Lake CPUs?
Is Coffee Lake really just a Skylake with 6 and 8 cores and same with Comet Lake or were there any IPC improvements even if minimal?
Is Coffee Lake really just a Skylake with 6 and 8 cores and same with Comet Lake or were there any IPC improvements even if minimal?
Man of Honour
I looked into various upgrade paths to get a noticeable boost in performance for games/apps over the years from the 6700K and could not see any sizeable gains that made the jump from the OCd 6700K to a later gen that wasn't a 10th gen really.
slightly better memory controller is the only imporvement from 6700K I can think of. Didn't affect IPC directly, but allowed use of faster memory sticks.
And as 4-core comet lake would have less cache than 6700K, could even lose some IPC.
I think 8 cores (same as 'new' consoles) is generally enough for now, 12 cores if building a new PC.
With Intel, I'm not convinced, but E-Cores generally help performance a little bit.
I'm CPU limited by single core speed now, in games like Watchdogs: Legion, probably other recent Ubisoft titles. too So, a high end 8 core is fairly optimal for games (Anything more recent than Comet Lake and 11th gen).
Also CPU limited in Total War:WH3 on the campaign map benchmark, but probably not an issue during gameplay.
With Intel, I'm not convinced, but E-Cores generally help performance a little bit.
I'm CPU limited by single core speed now, in games like Watchdogs: Legion, probably other recent Ubisoft titles. too So, a high end 8 core is fairly optimal for games (Anything more recent than Comet Lake and 11th gen).
Also CPU limited in Total War:WH3 on the campaign map benchmark, but probably not an issue during gameplay.
Last edited:
Soldato
Games don't care about the number of cores. They need processing power.
There are some games out there that do scale beyond 8 cores, but none of them (and none in the future) will perform better on a 12c zen 3 than on an 8p core alderlake. So if you care about gaming, get alderlake, it will always be faster than the zen 3.
Man of Honour
Single core performance on 12th gen Intel is supreme, I mean just look at where the tables sit for the CPU-Z bench: https://valid.x86.fr/bench/1
Yeah, a shame that it looks like Intel is basically recycling the Golden Cove cores used in the 12th gen, for the 13th generation.
Like you say, they have the advantage still, Zen 4 I think will catch up with Alder Lake in single threaded performance.
Last edited:
Soldato
It makes it even more wow considering most 12900ks can boost to 5.5+ on ST. Mine can do 5.7 with a score of 927 or something, and the difference at that point is just insane.
How would some games scale beyond 8 cores, but not perform better with them? Is them scaling beyond 8 more redundancy than anything?? Or is there any performance benefit??
How much better is Alder Lake IPC at same clock compared to Zen 3. Some have said it is only 11% higher. Some have said 20%. Some say they trade blows and it is even less.
Soldato
They would perform better if you compare 8 zen cores with 12 zen cores. But if you compare zen with alderlake, the dynamic changes.
Soldato
It depends on the workload and testing IPC is meaningless.
Yes true which is a shame there are not more than 8 Alder Lake P cores.
Though do they really scale that well beyond 8 cores or is it more just using extra cores because it can spread load even though it has 0 need to?? Like does the game engine see the extra cores and decide to split load and use less CPU cycles on more cores than more on less??
You are sc limited in WDL with a 10700k + 3080 at 4K or 1080p?
I did some 1440p benchmarks of that game with a 3080 and R5 3600 just before I upgraded to a 5800X and found no difference in averages or 1% lows.
there's always going to be a main thread for whatever game that defines how fast the game can run.
6 fast cores probably beats 8 slower cores.
not every core is maxed out to begin with only one or two will be 100%, the other cores will be assigned to less intensive parts of the game.
it's not like rendering a video where you can equally distribute the load
