I am tired of everyone claiming "6 cores do nothing for games," and tired of hearing "you only need 8 gigs of ram."

[Imabigmac]

Okay I get it. But what about the extra cost? Is the extra cost truly worth it? What kind of FPS boost are we talking about ?    

 

The  "quad core and 8GB is all you need" statement is valid for a lot of users. Some will obviously need more. The fact though that some people will by that statement as though it was one of ten commandments for a Christian, is quite honestly sad. It just reflects that some are incapable of reading between the lines. 

 

 

And people talk about Intel vs AMD threads exploding.... 

[Fate]

I don't know where people get their stats from, but with a Core 2 Duo at 4GHz and a gtx 970 I was able to get 99% gpu usage. And I got that from GPUz, GPU shark and HWmonitor. Only the frying northbridge is the issue.

 

In what games? I guarantee that's not the case in something CPU-bound like BF4.

I got my stats [GPU usage] from MSI Afterburner and I tested 960T at stock, 3.8GHZ, unlocked to six core @ 3.4GHz, and 3570k at stock. All had significant performance increases in BF4.

[BurgerBum]

Firstly, why are you being so harsh as if this is something super serious to complain about? This disgusts you? I'm glad we're living in such a perfect world that the thing that disgusts you is someone making a freaking PC component recommendation.

 

With that said, and to actually respond to your statements, you and OP are overlooking budgeting and balancing - OP is also overlooking the dated hardware he's using in comparison to today's popular recommendations.

dated hardware?

 

idk about you but a delorean is pretty dated.

badass AF.

 

(dont u dare tak ethat out of context)

[Guest Kloaked]

dated hardware?

 

idk about you but a delorean is pretty dated.

badass AF.

 

(dont u dare tak ethat out of context)

 

u fokin wot m9

 

1v1 rust 1080 no scope final kil

[BurgerBum]

Ever heard of HDD thrashing. And as I said, that rig had the bare minimum on it for everything to work-didn't even have antivirus. Also note that its a very in-expensive rig, just like my main one. Nothing was mentioned about enthusiast level computers.

 

Ps. 1 core was faster than any FX cpu core at the same frequency (in MOPS)

again missed my point.

(either that or you didnt show that you got it)

 

 

its all just better to have...

[Speedyv]

And I never see anybody recommending a quad core FX/Phenom instead of a 6300/x6 Phenom. It's almost always a 4440/4460 i5.

Which is better than a 6300 for gaming.

[Dabombinable]

In what games? I guarantee that's not the case in something CPU-bound like BF4.

I got my stats [GPU usage] from MSI Afterburner and I tested 960T at stock, 3.8GHZ, unlocked to six core @ 3.4GHz, and 3570k at stock. All had significant performance increases in BF4.

Its called doing a GPU burn with MSI kombuster (since the standard Furmark causes Nvidia and AMD gpus to throttle). And it can cause even the best GPUs to fail.

[BurgerBum]

u fokin wot m9

 

1v1 rust 1080 no scope final kil

*puts on rainbow tights and cape, traffic cone for a helmet, grabs my cheeto sword and runs into the woods*

NO CAMPING FRAG LIMIT 15 HEADSHOTS ONLY

[Fate]

Its called doing a GPU burn with MSI kombuster (since the standard Furmark causes Nvidia and AMD gpus to throttle). And it can cause even the best GPUs to fail.

That test is irrelevant due to it being a synthetic stress test, you need to test real games that are CPU bound before you can make a blanket statement saying Core2Duo doesn't bottleneck a 970.

[Jack.EXE]

OP is also overlooking the dated hardware he's using in comparison to today's popular recommendations.

I'm not overlooking this, but it does make a good apples to apples comparison, does it not?

 

Same clock speed, Same cache per core, same architecture, same everything except the number of cores.

[xToFxREAPER]

Firstly, why are you being so harsh as if this is something super serious to complain about? This disgusts you? I'm glad we're living in such a perfect world that the thing that disgusts you is someone making a freaking PC component recommendation.

 

With that said, and to actually respond to your statements, you and OP are overlooking budgeting and balancing - OP is also overlooking the dated hardware he's using in comparison to today's popular recommendations.

Yes it disgusts me that people can be so ignorant and close minded. To me it feels as though they have to be right and they'll argue to their Graves for it when they could simply embrace the fact that there are so many viable options out there. Instead they'll argue it to no end because they want to maintain their ego. To throw the same generic recommendation at everyone seems rather foolish and lazy.

[Guest Kloaked]

I'm not overlooking this, but it does make a good apples to apples comparison, does it not?

 

Same clock speed, Same cache per core, same architecture, same everything except the number of cores.

 

With your two chips, yes. Not with today's recommendations, which is what you're complaining about.

[Dabombinable]

again missed my point.

(either that or you didnt show that you got it)

 

 

its all just better to have...

My point was (I know I should have been more clear) that an FX cpu with more cores will do a lot better when it comes to games.

[Jack.EXE]

Okay I get it. But what about the extra cost? Is the extra cost truly worth it? What kind of FPS boost are we talking about ?    

 

The  "quad core and 8GB is all you need" statement is valid for a lot of users. Some will obviously need more. The fact though that some people will by that statement as though it was one of ten commandments for a Christian, is quite honestly sad. It just reflects that some are incapable of reading between the lines. 

 

 

And people talk about Intel vs AMD threads exploding.... 

Exactly. I'm going to mark this post solved BTW.

And it is quite funny, this thread is already becoming an intel VS AMD argument.

[BurgerBum]

Okay I get it. But what about the extra cost? Is the extra cost truly worth it? What kind of FPS boost are we talking about ?    

 

The  "quad core and 8GB is all you need" statement is valid for a lot of users. Some will obviously need more. The fact though that some people will by that statement as though it was one of ten commandments for a Christian, is quite honestly sad. It just reflects that some are incapable of reading between the lines. 

 

 

And people talk about Intel vs AMD threads exploding.... 

dotn even mentionit.

i can hear fanboys running with thier false statements and invalid points running already.

 

amd and intel are equal.

amd and nvidia are equal.

doritos and lays are equal.

cats and dogs are equal.

mars and the moon are equal

EVERYONE IS PRETTY PLEEZZZ NO FIGHTING ITS ANNOYING AS FUCK

[Dabombinable]

That test is irrelevant due to it being a synthetic stress test, you need to test real games that are CPU bound before you can make a blanket statement saying Core2Duo doesn't bottleneck a 970.

Did that as well, Skyrim @ 4K DSR with the real vision mods and the ones recommended for it. I got 99% usage on that as well (bit of an FPS hit though but still above 40 on average).

[Guest Kloaked]

Yes it disgusts me that people can be so ignorant and close minded. To me it feels as though they have to be right and they'll argue to their Graves for it when they could simply embrace the fact that there are so many viable options out there. Instead they'll argue it to no end because they want to maintain their ego. To throw the same generic recommendation at everyone seems rather foolish and lazy.

 

Lol.

 

There's nothing wrong with the generic recommendation if it works. Are we supposed to be hipsters now?

 

"Ah man, you don't want that i5 that will run well with your 980 when you're trying to push 4k, too many people are buying that stuff. You need to get an old Athalon, those things are just fine."

 

Seriously? Unless I'm just not understanding something here.

[BurgerBum]

With your two chips, yes. Not with today's recommendations, which is what you're complaining about.

yay! 

penis!

[Jack.EXE]

Lol.

 

There's nothing wrong with the generic recommendation if it works. Are we supposed to be hipsters now?

 

"Ah man, you don't want that i5 that will run well with your 980 when you're trying to push 4k, too many people are buying that stuff. You need to get an old Athalon, those things are just fine."

 

Seriously? Unless I'm just not understanding something here.

I think his point is not to not reccomend what works, but rather to avoid the echochamber that is the tech world.

[Fate]

Did that as well, Skyrim @ 4K DSR with the real vision mods and the ones recommended for it. I got 99% usage on that as well (bit of an FPS hit though but still above 40 on average).

At 4k you're entirely GPU bound (you could use a single core Pentium and get similar results), I'd like you to test a game like BF4 at 1080p to see if it bottlenecks.

But... we're completely derailing the thread so if you wanna continue shoot me a PM. 

[Guest Kloaked]

I think his point is not to not reccomend what works, but rather to avoid the echochamber that is the tech world.

 

That's a conflicting thing to do, since the echo chamber that's recommending an i5 with 8GB of memory with a nice GPU - recommending something that works that will fit many budgets.

[Dabombinable]

At 4k you're entirely GPU bound (you could use a single core Pentium and get similar results), I'd like you to test a game like BF4 at 1080p to see if it bottlenecks.

But... we're completely derailing the thread so if you wanna continue shoot me a PM. 

Have you ever tried running BF4 on a dual core? I gave up playing it on my OC rig due to the sudden lag spikes (gpu and CPU maxed out).

[Jack.EXE]

The point of this thread was never to say that a phenom II x6 was any better than a quad core i5.

 

The point of this thread was to give an apples to apples comparison of two chips from the same line of parts, to show that games do benifit from more than 4 cores, whether directly like Planetside 2 or Crysis, or indirectly by taking load off the gaming cores.

[Imabigmac]

doritos and lays are equal.

 

 

mars and the moon are equal

 

Idk about these two

[Dabombinable]

The point of this thread was never to say that a phenom II x6 was any better than a quad core i5.

 

The point of this thread was to give an apples to apples comparison of two chips from the same line of parts, to show that games do benifit from more than 4 cores, whether directly like Planetside 2 or Crysis, or indirectly by taking load off the gaming cores.

The same things true for dual and quad cores. (Going to compare with an Xeon just to get the differences)