By: RichardC (tich.delete@this.pobox.com), May 14, 2013 12:09 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Ricardo B (ricardo.b.delete@this.xxxxx.xx) on May 14, 2013 11:18 am wrote:
> Actually, this question should be different.
> If you're going to use FPS as the benchmark for games, does high end CPU
> performance even matter or should you just go and get a faster GPU?
The benchmarks I saw showed that 4C/4T vs 4C/8T at 3.8GHz was
pretty equal; but 4C/4T 4.0GHz was significantly faster than 4C/4T 3.8GHz.
That's quite strong evidence that cpu performance does make a difference,
but that hyperthreading is not particularly helpful for current game engines.
I expect budget-conscious gamers would go for a Core i5 (4C/4T) and spend the
extra money on a $200+ GPU.
Anyhow, getting back on-topic, various people were saying that gaming was a
justification for SMT in desktop/laptop systems. But the numbers don't
support that: 4C/4T looks just as good as 4C/8T.
> Actually, this question should be different.
> If you're going to use FPS as the benchmark for games, does high end CPU
> performance even matter or should you just go and get a faster GPU?
The benchmarks I saw showed that 4C/4T vs 4C/8T at 3.8GHz was
pretty equal; but 4C/4T 4.0GHz was significantly faster than 4C/4T 3.8GHz.
That's quite strong evidence that cpu performance does make a difference,
but that hyperthreading is not particularly helpful for current game engines.
I expect budget-conscious gamers would go for a Core i5 (4C/4T) and spend the
extra money on a $200+ GPU.
Anyhow, getting back on-topic, various people were saying that gaming was a
justification for SMT in desktop/laptop systems. But the numbers don't
support that: 4C/4T looks just as good as 4C/8T.