high budget CPU

[cesrai]

It does affect the PC port to a certain extent, but it's more of how the developer codes the PC port.

Yes this ^^^.

[79wjd]

so guys for streaming wouldnt more cores and more threads give better performance than faster lesser cores???

i dont know... would like to know

Most games don't use more than four cores. A few can use more. Streaming benefits from having cores that aren't used in gaming. A 4790k is still the perfect cpu for streaming+gaming. 

 

Yes this ^^^.

It has nothing to directly do with that, other than it's easier to re-optimize a game using a similar scheme -- i.e. the game was optimized for 8 cores, so it's easier to maintain that 8-core optimization. 

Literally the same thing I already said. 

[Sauron]

Get a 5820k if you want to be sure you have enough ooomph to stream smoothly.

 

Don't even consider 980s, please! They are one of the most extremely overpriced pieces of consumer desktop hardware on the market! Do yourself a favour and wait for AMD's next launch or go for sli 970s (although don't touch 970s if you want 4k). Even an R9 295x2 is a significantly better choice than any amount of 980s.

[cesrai]

Most games don't use more than four cores. A few can use more. Streaming benefits from having cores that aren't used in gaming. A 4790k is still the perfect cpu for streaming+gaming. 

 

Literally the same thing I already said. 

Can you prove to me it's easier ??? and it looks like console don't use the 8 cores for games, it depends on the dev not the console having 8 cores.

[79wjd]

Can you prove to me it's easier ??? and it looks like console don't use the 8 cores for games, it depends on the dev not the console having 8 cores.

You're right, I should've been more clear. They use more than four cores -- most of the time. 

 

As for being easier.....take a news article from online, now copy that news article onto another piece of paper. Now go find a news article in a foreign language and do the same thing -- it will be significantly faster to copy an article into a language you're familiar with. Optimization isn't drastically different -- the more similar the two are the easier it is to optimize. 

[cesrai]

You're right, I should've been more clear. They use more than four cores -- most of the time. 

 

As for being easier.....take a news article from online, now copy that news article onto another piece of paper. Now go find a news article in a foreign language and do the same thing -- it will be significantly faster to copy an article into a language you're familiar with. Optimization isn't drastically different -- the more similar the two are the easier it is to optimize. 

I get that but isn't the PC port the first on made ?? -real question-

[79wjd]

I get that but isn't the PC port the first on made ?? -real question-

ironically, no (well, it depends on the game), a console port is coded on a computer but written for a console and then ported to pc -- otherwise it wouldn't be a console port. 

[cesrai]

ironically, no (well, it depends on the game), a console port is coded on a computer but written for a console and then ported to pc -- otherwise it wouldn't be a console port. 

Fair enough, just waiting for @LukaP opinion on this. 

[othertomperson]

Well, Yes/no. A 4690k will yield more or less the same performance in most games now. However, with the consoles having 8 cores and DX12 equalizing the load across all the cores, hyperthreading will probably become useful -- and if he can afford an i7 without sacrificng anything else, then it's only $100~ more. 

 

People have been making that case since Directx 10. I'll believe that when it happens.

[CommandMan7]

People buying the quad cores now will regret it in the future. As games become more optimized for multithreading, i7's might become much faster than i5's. Plus, until games with good multicore support are the norm, you can always disable hyperthreading on the 5930k for a faster hexa core until games that use 8+ threads start becoming common. 

[Hieb]

A 4790k is still plenty for that. 

And yes. Games on consoles are optimized for 8-cores, as such newer cpu games (especially the less optimized ones) do take advantage of more cores (Watch Dogs, Dragon Age Inquisition, BF4, etc...)

 

Just to nitpick here, the consoles are optimized for 5-6 cores since 2-3 are reserved for the operating system. If memory serves the Xbox One previously had only 5 cores available for the game devs but they are now increasing that to 7, while the PS4 used only 6 cores for games and 2 for OS. Could have it wrong but I know the devs don't have access to all of them.

[79wjd]

Just to nitpick here, the consoles are optimized for 5-6 cores since 2-3 are reserved for the operating system. If memory serves the Xbox One previously had only 5 cores available for the game devs but they are now increasing that to 7, while the PS4 used only 6 cores for games and 2 for OS. Could have it wrong but I know the devs don't have access to all of them.

Still more than four  

 

/also that has been pointed out a bit above. 

[LukaP]

Then why are those games crap ???? still don't think it does, @LukaP what is your take on this ?? I would value your opinion. 

which games? crap in what way?

[Faa]

I don't think Console having 8 cores affects the PC port, DX12 will help, but console having 8 cores won't.

Usually the engine is built on 1 thread, that's the thread that actually really needs to be split across multiple threads to utilize more cores for further performance, basically that's what theyre trying to do on consoles now. Besides 2 cores were reserved for the OS, so they only had 6 to play with hence why BF4 doesn't see any performance gains from a 5960x > 6 core except for the 8350 > 6300 but that had more to do with CMT.

As far as I've seen only two games were capable of pushing my 3930K to around 70% usage, Crysis 3 (it's only in the jungles map happening) and Metro 2033 Redux benchmark (never happens in the game itself).

Watch Dogs ran bad because;

1) Running out of VRAM, horrible memory management

2) CPU bottleneck

3) 6 threaded optimization bs meant nothing if the main thread was heavily bottlenecked slowing other threads completely down

4) Ubisoft never tested the game

5) Idiocy

But you're right, those "6/8 core optimizations" didn't solve anything other than seeing more CPU resources being used but still failing to be GPU bound.

[Scarymonkeys]

Honestly, 5830k's and 5820k's, along with 5960X's, are horribly priced. Yes, for gaming, an i5 is more than enough, but if you're heavily streaming, then the 4790k is for you, assuming you're overclocking. Now, why are 5820k's and 5830k's overpriced? Well, on top of buying the CPU for more money with almost no performance difference, you have to pay for DDR4, which has absolutely no advantage over DDR3 and X99 chipsets, which are extremely overpriced. 

[79wjd]

Honestly, 5830k's and 5820k's, along with 5960X's, are horribly priced. Yes, for gaming, an i5 is more than enough, but if you're heavily streaming, then the 4790k is for you, assuming you're overclocking. Now, why are 5820k's and 5830k's overpriced? Well, on top of buying the CPU for more money with almost no performance difference, you have to pay for DDR4, which has absolutely no advantage over DDR3 and X99 chipsets, which are extremely overpriced. 

5820k's have a huge performance difference compared to a 4790k -- just not in gaming. 

 

Also, X99 chipsets aren't overpriced when you realize that they support three and four wya SLI -- something which would require a PLX chip on a z97 motherboard -- which make the boards cost the same amount. 

[Scarymonkeys]

5820k's have a huge performance difference compared to a 4790k -- just not in gaming. 

 

Also, X99 chipsets aren't overpriced when you realize that they support three and four wya SLI -- something which would require a PLX chip on a z97 motherboard -- which make the boards cost the same amount. 

It supports SLI, but SLI can be very unstable past x2, and in x2 in general. Much better to buy one single card. 

[79wjd]

It supports SLI, but SLI can be very unstable past x2, and in x2 in general. Much better to buy one single card. 

Two, three, and four-way SLI are by no means unstable. The scaling in gaming just sucks at three or four way. But X99 isn't designed to be a gaming platform. Also, no two 970s is only a little bit more expensive than a single 980 with significantly more power. A single GPU setup is not always the right answer. 

[Scarymonkeys]

two, three, and four-way SLI are by no means unstable. The scaling in gaming just sucks at three or four way. But X99 isn't designed to be a gaming platform. Also, no two 970s is only a little bit more expensive than a single 980 with significantly more power. A single GPU setup is not always the right answer. 

The games being poorly optimized for it is what I was aiming at.

[m_tieu]

I haven't had any issues with my 2 way sli. Most modern games are optimized to work with it and the performance difference is noticeable enough to make the second card worth buying. Older games that aren't optimized can be played on a single card with high enough frame rates. 3 and 4 way graphics support is more for hardware accelerated content creation where scaling for multi GPU configurations are more linear.

[cesrai]

which games? crap in what way?

Not that, my question is how much does a console having 8 cores affect the PC port ??? does it make it easier to optimize 8 cores on PC ??? or it doesn't make a difference ?? 

[cesrai]

Usually the engine is built on 1 thread, that's the thread that actually really needs to be split across multiple threads to utilize more cores for further performance, basically that's what theyre trying to do on consoles now. Besides 2 cores were reserved for the OS, so they only had 6 to play with hence why BF4 doesn't see any performance gains from a 5960x > 6 core except for the 8350 > 6300 but that had more to do with CMT.

As far as I've seen only two games were capable of pushing my 3930K to around 70% usage, Crysis 3 (it's only in the jungles map happening) and Metro 2033 Redux benchmark (never happens in the game itself).

Watch Dogs ran bad because;

1) Running out of VRAM, horrible memory management

2) CPU bottleneck

3) 6 threaded optimization bs meant nothing if the main thread was heavily bottlenecked slowing other threads completely down

4) Ubisoft never tested the game

5) Idiocy

But you're right, those "6/8 core optimizations" didn't solve anything other than seeing more CPU resources being used but still failing to be GPU bound.

Now when you split the load across multiple threads doesn't that introduce wasted time ??? like in one task maybe one of the threads will be waiting for the result from another task by another thread, so that time that the thread spent waiting was wasted and could have been used better.

[79wjd]

Now when you split the load across multiple threads doesn't that introduce wasted time ??? like in one task maybe one of the threads will be waiting for the result from another task by another thread, so that time that the thread spent waiting was wasted and could have been used better.

Yes, thats always been an inherent issue with heavily threaded workloads as you're often forced to wait for information being processed in another core. However, there are still ways to work around this by keeping similar (interdependent) tasks on the same cores while spreading everything else out across multiple. I.e. it's definitely still doable and will eventually be something that has to happen (unless developers suddenly find a way to increase cpu performance by a meaningful amount).

[Faa]

Now when you split the load across multiple threads doesn't that introduce wasted time ??? like in one task maybe one of the threads will be waiting for the result from another task by another thread, so that time that the thread spent waiting was wasted and could have been used better.

Lol, not on the fly when you're gaming but during development of the game. 

[cesrai]

Lol, not on the fly when you're gaming but during development of the game. 

Really I mean really, so yeah it introduces wasted time according to your answer.