Hands up who remembers when...
- Thread starter alienware
- Start date
alienware
Banned
Now or then?
If you mean now? their 8 core desktop CPUs. As soon as they are in cahoots with Sony and M$ and pretty much have every game developer at their finger tips the world will be their gaming oyster.
Think about it. They have the gaming industry pretty much sewn up.
vorticalbox
New member
that they do
AMD chips in both xbox and PS as well as PC gaming rigs and now owning ATI it looks like they are set to do it again
vorticalbox
New member
alienware
Banned
I would imagine that the logistics of how the cores are laid out and the physical side would be identical. Why reinvent the wheel?
I don't think that the current happenings will squeeze more performance out, per se, but, will make sure that all of the cores are being used.
I see it like this. Basically AMD have cores that are inferior to Intel's. Every review spent most of the review pointing this out and running single/dual threaded apps and games to highlight how much better Intel were.
But, what happens when all of a sudden all eight cores are suddenly used and brought to life? what happens when it is no longer about single threaded performance and all about a "core race" and how many cores you have?
Lately it's been proven that given the right circumstances 8 of AMD's cores, when being used fully, out perform 4 of Intel's and 4 HT cores (I7 3770, I am referring to Crysis 3).
Can you see Intel being able to sell 8 core CPUs for £120?
Right now a dual core I3 is £92. A 8 core AMD is £120. What happens when it becomes all about how many cores you have?
Edit to add.
The console CPU is X86. What you must remember though is that X86 (or 32 bit) games work perfectly well on a PC. 99% of PC games are 32 bit even now. That doesn't stop you using 8 cores
Last edited:
barnsley
born in a.....
Not in all the games. Crisis 3 for example (the test was done in 720p but the place results are the same at 1080p:
http://i1056.photobucket.com/albums/t364/Hunbug76/Crysis-3-Test-CPUs-VH-720p_zps221c9475.png
alienware
Banned
That's no longer true mate.
Hyperthreading provides about 30% of the power of a full core IIRC.
SieB
New member
Do really need more threads about this when there are already a few knocking around :lol:
Mainly this one
http://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=53106
Mainly this one
http://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=53106
Last edited:
So what? Who cares about hyperthreading?
Or ask TTL:
http://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=53106
Even a 3470 demolishes a 8350 in most games, a 3570k certainly does. I mean sure if you run it at stock the 8350 will win in certain benches on certain games, but who runs their 3570k at stock?
Even if you push your 8350 to 4.5ghz it won't beat Intel @ 4ghz, and 4ghz is pretty easy to achieve.
http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html
Even the 3470 at a mere 3.2ghz is only 1fps behind the 8350 @ 4ghz.
Or ask TTL:
http://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=53106
Even a 3470 demolishes a 8350 in most games, a 3570k certainly does. I mean sure if you run it at stock the 8350 will win in certain benches on certain games, but who runs their 3570k at stock?
Even if you push your 8350 to 4.5ghz it won't beat Intel @ 4ghz, and 4ghz is pretty easy to achieve.
http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html
Even the 3470 at a mere 3.2ghz is only 1fps behind the 8350 @ 4ghz.
SieB
New member
Did you actually read through that thread
http://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=53106
and look at the vids and other links posted in it showing that the 8350 beats the 3570k and 3770k in a lot games.
It destroys the 3570k in anything multi threaded, and isn't far behind the 3770k which is £100 more.
And benches mean nothing, they don't reflect real world performance. Unless you are a overclocker you don't sit at your PC running benches all day so whether Intel scores higher in them doesn't matter because you don't play benchmarks you play games and run programs.
AMD are cheaper than Intel and performance wise better at some things and not so at others. Even where they are behind it's not by much, as I said before the 3770k is £100 more but the 8350 is only just behind it in most things and in gaming it beats it at a few games.
barnsley
born in a.....
Good thing they are the same price then
. The 8320 has very similar performance compared to the 8350 and it is £120. In games that don't have any multi-threading (ARMA 2 and 3 are an excellent example of when you need strong individual cores unless you force the game to multi thread) intel will be much better and will continue to be for some time. Also, considering the new consoles will depend very heavily on multithreading to get the job done I think you'll find it will be much more important.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
alienware
Banned
Absolutely. The single threaded argument is now being replaced why the "But what happens when all the cores work?".
It isn't just that really funny American guy with a beard, either. Linus put the 8350 against the 3570k and it was tit for tat, and that was before the hot fixes.
This is just like the release of Kepler. It beat the 7970 until AMD put it right and when they did it was a chuffing NIGHTMARE trying to get people to acknowledge the 7970 was the faster card.
MacLeod
New member
Very few things seem to use just one thread these days. I have the All CPU Meter gadget running on my desktop all the time and whenever I come out of a game or other application, the usage graph shows many cores with a lot of activity. I think that even though an application is single threaded, Windows will make use of the extra cores just standing around doing nothing.
barnsley
born in a.....
Not even minecraft uses one thread. MINECRAFT. I'm pretty sure GTA San Andreas is the only game I've played on my 8xxx system (before I broke it >>) I didn't see using more than 1 core. Even games that aren't really good at multi threading (e.g. planetside 2) I didn't have performance issues with. It probably still is a tad behind compared to a i5 with that game but considering the only person I was playing with who had a i5 also had some sort of modified 580 I don't think it would've been a fair comparison.
Even for multi-threaded games there is inevitably one main thread, and if that main thread isn't running fast enough the other threads don't really matter.
Not all tasks can be run in parallel, I mean if they could we'd just use GPUs for everything.
So in a perfect game AMD can equal Intel, well that's fine if you limit yourself to only playing those games. But when being equal is the best case scenario my money is still going to Intel.
Not all tasks can be run in parallel, I mean if they could we'd just use GPUs for everything.
So in a perfect game AMD can equal Intel, well that's fine if you limit yourself to only playing those games. But when being equal is the best case scenario my money is still going to Intel.
MacLeod
New member
I LOL'd!
Yeah that does pretty much show that the future does seem to finally be moving away from single core IPC being king. Man how cool would it be if AMD was right all along with this architecture? Too early to say I know but for us AMD fanboys, it sends a little tingle down the leg thinking of all the trash we'll get to talk to the Intel fanboys. :lol:
