CPU for running 2 games simultaneously

[Horski]

Hello, 

 

I am running a dual monitor setup off of one gpu, I play 2 games simultaneously.  One rpg like Witcher 3 or modded skyrim, and one turn based like civilisation or total war.  I am looking to upgrade my system and was curuous if anyone could tell me what a set up and use case like this would benefit more from in the cpu.  Would faster core speeds like the 9900k or better multithreaded performance like the ryzen 3900x be in my best interest?  

 

Thanks!

 

P. S. I am not necessarily choosing between those two parts, they are just examples for comparison. 

[goto10]

on your case it could be a good idea the 9900k

 

dont worry about fanboys, i am a amd fanboy, people is very decent on this forum

 

the 3900 could be useful if you plan to stream or capture gameplay on the same pc, is abit overkill cpu but actually you could be a perfect user for such cpu

[Horski]

No streaming or anything, I only really play 2 games, or game and watch something to utilize 2 monitors.  You think the faster speeds on 8 cores will be better than slower but more cores? 

[goto10]

the new ryzen is not considerably slower, if you dont want to record or stream, you can even go for a 8 cores on amd side

 

intel is abit better for games, that is why i mention it first

 

the problem i see at the moment with 9900k is that intel might release a new cpu lineup soon, is still a rumor, but if it hapens, the socket and the cpu itself will loose value inmendiatelly

[bignaz]

I9 lmfao

 

 

Go with the 3900x. Vastly superior for what you wanna use it for. 

[GoldenLag]

3900x. Tho you might want to wait for 3950x. 

 

 

Tho 1 core for hypervisor and 5 cores for one and 6 cores for the other should be fine. 

 

While nice, the 9900k isnt the way to go

[GoldenLag]

17 minutes ago, goto10 said:

the problem i see at the moment with 9900k is that intel might release a new cpu lineup soon, is still a rumor, but if it hapens, the socket and the cpu itself will loose value inmendiatelly

Intel is at best releasing a 10 core coffelake refresh. Nothing interesting comming from them untill late 2020 or 2021.

[GoldenLag]

10 minutes ago, Horski said:

You think the faster speeds on 8 cores will be better than slower but more cores? 

The difference is so small, going for the extra cores for other games make up for it

[goto10]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

Intel is at best releasing a 10 core coffelake refresh. Nothing interesting comming from them untill late 2021 or 2022.

that is correct, but it seems that they will change socket, so the current socket and cpu line dies there and 10 cores will make look really bad the 8 cores part

[ThePD]

3900X for sure

[bignaz]

10 core refresh from Intel ehh? You mean the extremely fake leak Intel fanboys put out that's been debunked by pretty much everyone lol.

 

14nm++++

 

If we're going to play the waiting game just wait for Ryzen 3. Then Ryzen 4. Or Intel's 10nm. Should be finished by then. 

[GoldenLag]

4 minutes ago, goto10 said:

that is correct, but it seems that they will change socket, so the current socket and cpu line dies there and 10 cores will make look really bad the 8 cores part

No it wont..... The 8 core parts run hot enough allready. 10 cores is the same but worse in every way. The ringbus gets longer, meaning worse IPC, or they use mesh which again is worse than ringbus

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, bignaz said:

10 core refresh from Intel ehh? You mean the extremely fake leak Intel fanboys put out that's been debunked by pretty much everyone lol

Nope, much older leak and general talk.

 

People keep saying that were im taking it from, but far from it. 

 

2 minutes ago, bignaz said:

Then Ryzen 4. Or Intel's 10nm. Should be finished by then. 

Zen 2+/3 should be out before intel can make their 10nm game at desktop. Again, its late 2020/21. 

 

Sorry, used wrong date earlier. I used the date for 7nm fab being online, which is the wrong one. 

[Horski]

Hmm were going off topic with possible future products and whatnot.  Let me be more specific.  When running two games will performance benefit more from faster cores on x amount of cores (Intel) or better performance on the threads (amd).  AFAIK games prefer the faster single core speeds and don't really saturate the threads enough to make better multi threaded the clear winner.  Hoping someone with some knowledge of this will chip in here! 

[Evolution.]

why is nobody asking the real question of why this man wants to run 2 games at once??\

[Horski]

Downtime between long turn times 

[Bello]

Literally signed up just to see if OP found a solution, I'm somewhat in the same boat right now & was wondering if there is a definitive choice for this sort of use case?