find a better source please, tom's hardware is bull.. I found 2 http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html http://www.overclock.net/t/1362591/gamegpu-crysis-3-final-gpu-cpu-scaling Edit: and no need for nitpicking FX8350, i suggested both and yeah he will benefit more from HT or more "cores" in the near future.
Only that Russian site disagrees with all the others, the first one you linked to (Techspot) shows the FX-8350 keeping pace only with the i5-3470, which is slower than the i5-3570k. The other test from the Denmark site is downright ludicrous. You have a Phenom keeping pace with an i5-2500k, and the FX-8350 somehow jumps past even the i7-3770k (something none of the other sites even show close to happening).
gaming rig. No need to OC. That All I need to hear. CPU : Intel CPU Core i5 3450 Mobo : ASRock H77 ATX USB3.0 SATA3 H77 Pro4/MVP RAM : CORSAIR DDR3 1600MHz 8GB Vengeance GPU : AMD 7870 PSU : Corsair 550W TX Have fun sir. If you want to play games on max quality you need to get better GPU.
What the hell, here's my thoughts. The last 4 builds I went with Intel. They were awesome. Ever since the C2D came out they've been great. I was torn on this upgrade though and decided on AMD. The sole reason came down to this. Our world of computers relies so heavily on consoles and with AMD running the entire show on that front I believe we are going to see more and more games written to take advantage of their chips and video cards. My belief is because of that Intel is going to be playing the catch up game as far as the gaming arena goes. That may be different with office and other programs but since I truly only game I chose this path for this upgrade.
Thats not going to happen anytime soon, majority of games are and will still be using 4 threads at best for the next few years. With your theory, ALL xbox ports should automatically run better on amd hardware, but thats not happened now has it. Intel will be better for majority of games for a long while to come, only games like crysis 3 can amd 8 threads perform about on par with intels i5/i7s
OMG ****ing internet forum police. uke2::3eyes: intel is my choice, just search around the net for VS. benches on your choices.
This will begin to happen when the new PS4 and Xbox's start to appear within the year. Of course it hasn't happened with current Xbox's since they don't have 8 cores and also the game designers currently have to account for the fact that Nvidia has its hardware in the PS3. It's coming quicker than you think, especially with the increasing relations being established with AMD and game design companies.
Well you can dream on for a few more years for your wishful thinking to come true, cause games arent going to use more than 4 threads until most pcs have at least 4 cores or more. and your logic is flawed, new consoles are using a totally different architecture and are basically 8 core atoms with low clock speeds, they arent going to compare to high end cpus of today. since xbox uses AMD gpu from your reasoning all xbox 360 ports should perform better on amd gpus, which isnt the case. 5 years in the future i would say a stock 8350 would be a bit faster than the 4 core i5 3570 at stock from properly threaded games, but the 8350 will still be slower than all but first gen i7s, if you wanted to *future proof* you would have gotten a 3770k due to stronger per core performance for games that will use 4 threads at best, and for future games that will properly use 8 threads, like crysis 3 does. I understand choosing piledriver on a budget, but choosing purely on future proofing, that wasnt the best decision
I've seen some info claiming that Crysis 3 likes physical cores and does not utilize HT much if at all. And this claim that the majority of PC's use a four core CPU does not matter the consoles are where the money is so they will get priority and that will most likely translate to wider spread multi threaded games up to 8 threads.
I'm not even sure about that. 4 modules do not equal 8 full cores, as not all units exist twice within a single module, many are shared. Those 4 modules are much closer in performance to 6 real cores than they are to 8 full cores. And when you add in the much higher single thread performance of the Intel CPU's, 6 AMD cores roughly equal 4 Intel cores, and that only when the application makes good use of multiple threads.
All you have to do is look at only the heavily threaded benchmarks in anandtech to see that the 8350 will have a small advantage when those said benches can use 8 threads properly. If games will be able to use them as well, than the 8350 should match a stock 3570 at the least
No, games gain less from the use of multiple threads than other applications. It's because with games much more processing power is wasted on synchronizing the different threads, because with games, you can not have one thread move ahead as anything needs to be perfectly synchronized at any time. And apart from the recourses wasted on synchronization, many cores will have to wait or run only @ reduced speed for the same reason, which again reduces the gain from more available threads.
There ya go. The new consoles will take advantage of all 8 cores. This includes taking advantage of all 8 cores on a high end PC. Also the current Xbox's have nothing to do with what where gaming is going nor does it have anything to do with where games are at now other than holding them back being they were made in 2005.....
That does make sense to me actually. In compression apps, ie, rar, the threading doesnt have to be in order, it can work on multiple parts in any order just as long as the end result is achieved, ie, the compressed file. I can see in games how that doesnt necessarily apply. But still, other elements in the game can still take good advantage of the multi-threading. ps. On second thought, I dont think its significant. Threads are constantly dropped and restarted according to the tasks at hand, and of course, its a balancing act, but properly coded games should and can easily make use of multi/hyper threading.
Never learned to read statistics, or did you? Because what those benchmarks you just posted show, is that a six core i7 (i7 3690X) that not only has 2 physical cores more, but with HT 8 logical threads more, not to mention twice the memory bandwidth, is barely 10% faster than that i5 which also runs 100Mhz slower. I call that a poor gain from the additional threads, which was pretty much what I said before. Yes, because in-game you can't have sound, physics, or anything else run ahead of the rest, the result would range from completely weird to absolutely unplayable depending on what runs out of sync.
Uhm youre looking at a gpu limited bottleneck. Whats your point? Add 3 titans and the 6xcore would scale muuuch higher.