CPU for 144hz?

[Guest]

What cpu do i need for a 144hz powered experience? For modern games

Will an i3 4340 do?

Using gtx 980

[OAcesync]

i3 will defo hold you back you're gonna need a i5

[jimakos234]

get at least an i5 4440/4460

[theereal]

Youre going to need an i5, and a 980 cant push 144FPS maxed out at 1080p on modern games, no GPU's can.

[Guest]

Youre going to need an i5, and a 980 cant push 144FPS maxed out at 1080p on modern games, no GPU's can.

that sucks. i hope a gpu can soon

[Coombzy]

Youre going to need an i5, and a 980 cant push 144FPS maxed out at 1080p on modern games, no GPU's can.

You don't need exactly 144 FPS, you just need over 60 FPS to notice the difference.

[Guest]

get at least an i5 4440/4460

whats the dif between a locked i5 and an i3 at the same speed? are the hyperthreaded cores not as powerful as the i5s real ones?

[SeanAngelo]

What cpu do i need for a 144hz powered experience? For modern games

Will an i3 4340 do?

Using gtx 980

i5 atleast. i3 will bottleneck it.

[theereal]

 

You don't need exactly 144 FPS, you just need over 60 FPS to notice the difference.

Theres a HUGE difference between example 60FPS & 120FPS, but as long as i stay above 60 i dont care.

 

 

whats the dif between a locked i5 and an i3 at the same speed? are the hyperthreaded cores not as powerful as the i5s real ones?

Exactly + games dont care about virtual cores (hyperthreading).

[jimakos234]

whats the dif between a locked i5 and an i3 at the same speed? are the hyperthreaded cores not as powerful as the i5s real ones?

real cores will perform way better than threads,because the core that is hyperthreaded  will present itself to the OS as two virtual cores. This allows it to read in two programs from memory  at the same time, but a single core with hyperthreading will not be as fast  as two physical cores because there will be times when both programs want to use the same part of the core and the available resources will end  being split between them.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Theres a HUGE difference between example 60FPS & 120FPS, but as long as i stay above 60 i dont care.

from my experience there is a very noticeable difference between 60FPS and 80FPS...but beyond that there is not much more smootness to gain to be honest...i would aim for 90FPS when possible...it's liquid smooth at this pace.

[theereal]

from my experience there is a very noticeable difference between 60FPS and 80FPS...but beyond that there is not much more smootness to gain to be honest...i would aim for 90FPS when possible...it's liquid smooth at this pace.

Never said 80FPS is not smoother than 60FPS I said theres a HUGE difference between 60FPS and 120FPS, and yes, you can see FPS above 120, theres quite a big difference actually.

[typographie]

Exactly + games dont care about virtual cores (hyperthreading).

 

Games will use virtual cores and run faster for them in most cases, they just aren't as fast as physical cores. Any difference you see between a Pentium and an i3 in games—or between an i5 and an i7 for that matter—can be attributed mostly to the presence of Hyperthreading.

[theereal]

Games will use virtual cores and run faster for them in most cases, they just aren't as fast as physical cores. Any difference you see between a Pentium and an i3 in games—or between an i5 and an i7 for that matter—can be attributed mostly to the presence of Hyperthreading.

will, i noticed that word in your sentence, beacuse they dont, an i7 really doesent perform better than an i5 of the same caliber, a 4690K@4.0Ghz vs a 4790K@Stock, they will perform equal, today games dont care about virtual cores, they want fast single core performance.

[Dabombinable]

from my experience there is a very noticeable difference between 60FPS and 80FPS...but beyond that there is not much more smootness to gain to be honest...i would aim for 90FPS when possible...it's liquid smooth at this pace.

Straight up the only reason I can stand my 60Hz 1080p screen is because of how much fits on it at once. my 85Hz 1024x768 LCD monitor is so much better for playing games (apart from the resolution) as they feel a lot smoother. It having far more realistic colour reproduction also helps as well (#LCDfromCRTdaysFTW)

[typographie]

will, i noticed that word in your sentence, beacuse they dont, an i7 really doesent perform better than an i5 of the same caliber, a 4690K@4.0Ghz vs a 4790K@Stock, they will perform equal, today games dont care about virtual cores, they want fast single core performance.

 

There are at least a few games that can actually scale with more than 4 cores. And when not GPU-limited, those games do run slightly but objectively faster on an i7 than an i5. You are correct that in most cases you cannot detect a difference. I'm an i5 user myself.

 

But we're talking about i3's here. Hyperthreading makes the i3 behave like a quad-core, which most newer games today can indeed take advantage of.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8232/overclockable-pentium-anniversary-edition-review-the-intel-pentium-g3258-ae/4

Across the board in this review, an i3-4330 at 3.5 GHz was at least as fast and usually faster than a 4.7 GHz Pentium G3258. Sometimes by a startlingly wide margin. Those are the same two Haswell cores, and with a clock speed deficit. I have to wonder how you'd explain that if not for Hyperthreading.

[theereal]

There are at least a few games that can actually scale with more than 4 cores. And when not GPU-limited, those games do run slightly but objectively faster on an i7 than an i5. You are correct that in most cases you cannot detect a difference. I'm an i5 user myself.

 

But we're talking about i3's here. Hyperthreading makes the i3 behave like a quad-core, which most newer games today can indeed take advantage of.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8232/overclockable-pentium-anniversary-edition-review-the-intel-pentium-g3258-ae/4

Across the board in this review, an i3-4330 at 3.5 GHz was at least as fast and usually faster than a 4.7 GHz Pentium G3258. Sometimes by a startlingly wide margin. Those are the same two Haswell cores, and with a clock speed deficit. I have to wonder how you'd explain that if not for Hyperthreading.

The i3 was faster than the Pentium? Stronger single core performance ofc...

[typographie]

The i3 was faster than the Pentium? Stronger single core performance ofc...

 

But they're the same Haswell cores operating at a 1.2 GHz deficit. The Pentium should have considerably stronger single-core performance, actually.

[CalebTheEternal]

Youre going to need an i5, and a 980 cant push 144FPS maxed out at 1080p on modern games, no GPU's can.

Really? I'm playing 1440p on 144hz on games like Battlefield on high, and I have SLI 970, which are a little more powerful than a single 980, I think it can get close since it's 1080p. 

[theereal]

 

Really? I'm playing 1440p on 144hz on games like Battlefield on high, and I have SLI 970, which are a little more powerful than a single 980, I think it can get close since it's 1080p.

I said that no GPU can pass 144hz maxed out on games, and they cant, you just proved my point, youre in SLI, and 2x970's are MUCH MUCH more powerful than a single 980, theyre more powerful than a Titan X or a 980Ti.

 

 

But they're the same Haswell cores operating at a 1.2 GHz deficit. The Pentium should have considerably stronger single-core performance, actually.

Yes, but games can take advantage of more cores, but not virtual cores...

[CalebTheEternal]

I said that no GPU can pass 144hz maxed out on games, and they cant, you just proved my point, youre in SLI, and 2x970's are MUCH MUCH more powerful than a single 980, theyre more powerful than a Titan X or a 980Ti.

Yes but again, I'm on 1440p, he is on 1080p isn't he? If you think about it that's a LOT more pixels. When I had my 1080p panel I could max out new titles and get over 100 FPS, if he wants to play game like CSGO at that he will be fine, and it will give him a better experience, I will never go back to 60Hz, I can't stand it, when I put a game on my other monitor it drives me crazy, I never did think 60 FPS was smooth, just never seemed like it to me, even 144Hz seems a bit choppy to me, but then again my eyes are insanely good.

 

 

Yes, but games can take advantage of more cores, but not virtual cores...

It depends on how many cores, games usually don't use more than 4 cores I believe. 

[typographie]

Yes, but games can take advantage of more cores, but not virtual cores...

 

… I just showed you benchmarks of games doing exactly that.  :huh:

 

From Anandtech's own conclusion:

"Certain games get a boost with the Pentium-AE overclocked, such as F1 2013 and Company of Heroes 2, but the overclocking is more important when it comes to multiple GPU scenarios. The downside of that conclusion is that an i3 is better at multiple GPU scenarios right off the bat, and for single GPU gaming the trend is towards games that can use the threads. This is a big discrepancy between when we used to overclock older CPU and today – the games today can use multiple cores. Having a lack of cores can really damage frame rates in some titles, especially when the amount of GPUs starts to rise."

[i_build_nanosuits]

Yes, but games can take advantage of more cores, but not virtual cores...

that's completely wrong...otherwise the pentium would play games as well as a core i3 and it's FAR from being true, and also you have all those games that run better on core i7 than they do on a core i5. Hyper-threading is used for games just like for everything else that require more threads to be processed than the amount of physical cores you have.

 

… I just showed you benchmarks of games doing exactly that. :huh:

From Anandtech's own conclusion:

"Certain games get a boost with the Pentium-AE overclocked, such as F1 2013 and Company of Heroes 2, but the overclocking is more important when it comes to multiple GPU scenarios. The downside of that conclusion is that an i3 is better at multiple GPU scenarios right off the bat, and for single GPU gaming the trend is towards games that can use the threads. This is a big discrepancy between when we used to overclock older CPU and today – the games today can use multiple cores. Having a lack of cores can really damage frame rates in some titles, especially when the amount of GPUs starts to rise."

^^ here is a good example of this, start this video at 3:05 and listen carefuly:

[theereal]

 

Yes but again, I'm on 1440p, he is on 1080p isn't he? If you think about it that's a LOT more pixels. When I had my 1080p panel I could max out new titles and get over 100 FPS, if he wants to play game like CSGO at that he will be fine, and it will give him a better experience, I will never go back to 60Hz, I can't stand it, when I put a game on my other monitor it drives me crazy, I never did think 60 FPS was smooth, just never seemed like it to me, even 144Hz seems a bit choppy to me, but then again my eyes are insanely good.

 

It depends on how many cores, games usually don't use more than 4 cores I believe.

What are you on about?

 

 

that's completely wrong...otherwise the pentium would play games as well as a core i3 and it's FAR from being true, and also you have all those games that run better on core i7 than they do on a core i5. Hyper-threading is used for games just like for everything else that require more threads to be processed than the amount of physical cores you have.

^^ here is a good example of this, start this video at 3:05 and l

 

that's completely wrong...otherwise the pentium would play games as well as a core i3 and it's FAR from being true, and also you have all those games that run better on core i7 than they do on a core i5. Hyper-threading is used for games just like for everything else that require more threads to be processed than the amount of physical cores you have.

^^ here is a good example of this, start this video at 3:05 and listen carefuly:

 

isten carefuly:

How is the instructions per cycle on that pentium? compared to the i3?

[CalebTheEternal]

that's completely wrong...otherwise the pentium would play games as well as a core i3 and it's FAR from being true, and also you have all those games that run better on core i7 than they do on a core i5. Hyper-threading is used for games just like for everything else that require more threads to be processed than the amount of physical cores you have.

Yeah but you need to keep in mind that the reason the pentium isn't the i3 is because it's slower, that's the reason pretty much, so yeah, if they made a 2 core i7 it would still be a LOT faster than the pentium, it's just core speeds, not just saying 2 cores. You need add more data to your reasoning.