I edited it to change it to overkill and took out the word extreme.īut in reality in your opinion for only gaming including multi player if you are not doing any streaming or running intensive background tasks other than the basic and HWInfo64 to monitor temps and MSI AfterBurner to monitor frame rates, is there any tangible benefit in any games to more than 8 cores on your CPU.Īnd if you think yes, how are the 7900X and 7950X? Is there a penalty of having 2 CCD with cross latency that could severely dip performance if game threads swap CCDs or have to communicate with one another on different CCDs? or no is it not at all an issue if a heavily threaded game is coded correctly? Win 11 Pro EN / Win 10 Pro EN / Win XP SP3 EN & Win7 SP1 EN Roccat Vulcan 121 AIMO / NOS C450 Mini Pro RGB / IBM keyboard Logitech MX518 Legendary / Logitech G400s / Mionix Avior 8200 Superlux HD668B + DAC / Creative 2.1 / Corsair HS35ĮVGA Supernova G2 750W / Seasonic FX-750 / Fractal ION Gold 550W Lenovo 32" 4K 60Hz + BenQ 24" 1080p 144Hz / ViewSonic 24" 1080p 60 Hz / Samsung 22" 1050p 60Hzĭefine Mini C / DeepCool CC560 WH / Fractal Focus G Radeon RX 6700 XT 12GB / Radeon R9 290X 4GB / Radeon X800 GT 256MB Gigabyte B550M Aorus Elite / Asus P8Z68-V Pro/Gen3 / Asus P5Q ProĪrctic Freezer 50 / Alphacool h2o / stock coolerģ2GB DDR4 3466C16 / 24GB DDR3 1600C9 / 8GB DDR2 800C5 Do you think those will hammer even a well tuned 13900K with e-cores off and fast DDR5 in gaming or will they trade blows?ĪMD Ry/ Intel i5-2500K 4.6GHz / Intel Pentium 4 631 4GHz Then there is Ryzen 7000 X3D chips coming out. Though you can get more than 8 strong cores? However however, only 8 strong cores on a single CCD/ring and I hear games are very latency sensitive, so if a game that scales beyond 8 cores or 6 cores in case of 7900X (2 6 core CCDs), would there be a latency penalty with thread communication cross CCDs causing a big dip in 1% and 0.1% lows in games? I hear it is an issue on Ryzen 9 7900X and 7950X, but it was fixed with Ryseries? Though was it only fixed by ensuring game threads stay on one CCD and if it had to hop over to the other or communicate with each other the other core on other CCD a big hit? Or is that not at all an issue? Obvious it is not for productivity work, but for games it is a different animal I hear. Pkus they still seem a bit behind even Alder Lake in gaming well tuned let alone Raptor Lake. Then you have AMD with the new Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 CPUs which have made some good gains, but they run so hot. To me the Intel Alder Lake and Raptor Lake parts are 8 core 16 thread CPUs with excellent P-cores and of course e-cores shut off to be a monster 8 core 16 thread gaming powerhouse. I do like the idea of future proofing a bit, but not at all a fan of Intel e-cores. And thus 8 cores 16 threads provides a little headroom for high end gaming? Or do any games actually start to benefit from more than 8 cores meaningfully? This is of course would be doing no streaming and no background tasks other than of course NOD32 AV, HWInfo64 and MSI Afterburner and other simple Windows services on WIN10 install with spyware shutdown. So is even 6 cores and 12 threads enough for high end gaming with an RTX 4090 at 1440P. Though some say games are starting to scale now to as many cores as you can throw at it though many disagree and say there is no proof of that and while games are more threaded it is limited to only a ertain number of cores and threads and 8 is easily enough and will be for many years as games are just impossible to make parallelism to lots more cores when coding them which mean they are a few thread limited and will be for years to come? Are there any games that actually meaningfully benefit from more than 8 cores? I have researched and most say no or an extreme rare few like shorter turn simulations or something or only if doing lots of streaming in background.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |