Aiemond said:
Where quads are becoming important is newer games. Look at Dragon Age. A quad runs it significantly better than a dual, which I believe gets bottlenecked at 40ish fps (have to look up exact numbers). Newer games will start using 3+ cores more and more as it is definatly trending that way.
As for the graphic card bottleneck Casey, I am not quite getting your argument. Your saying that CPUs are bottlenecking high end cards, which is right for some games, but then go on to state that those resolutions abover 1920X1200 are hard on the gpu, which is also right. CPU limits minimum frames and if it is the bottleneck then you will get the same fps if you are running at 800x600 or 1920X1200, but if gpu is the bottleneck, you will get lower fps as you add better detail settings and increase resolutions. But, the op is not gaming at even 1920 X 1200, so he is more likely to run into a cpu bottleneck with something like l4d. |
the price is fucking wrong on i7 lol, I don't care how much faster they are, it's plain wrong. I live stream PS2 emulation at full speed =P it's the streaming part that's tricky since that actually takes more CPU power at 640x480 in H.264 at real time lol. Use AMD for that and you pretty much get murdered.
same for dragon age, I live stream video games, and i5 does the job so well at it's price that it's simply incredible, it doesn't even go above 40% for the most part for me with the game, and I use the rest of the resources for live streaming at about 704x400 in H.264 as well.
I've never seen a bargin vs performance like the i5, or I haven't seen it since the original Celerons lol.