intel i7 980x question

Conner52

Currently Offline

1,694

188 posts since 03/07/09

Recent Badges:

So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.
Site Veteran Has been a VGChartz member for over 5 years.
3 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 3 years.
9 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 9 years.
14 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 14 years.
8 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 8 years.

Conner52 on 31 March 2010

lostintheodyssey said:
In my opinion there is no need to upgrade at this time since I don't think that there are any games that take advantage of 6 cores at the moment.

Off topic I'm new to this site how are people adding systems and games to their profile? When I go to games owned it says 0 and I don't see any links to change it.

You must go to the game page and at the bottom there is an option to add you as an owner. As for systems, it is automatic. For example if you add Pokemon Ruby then GBA will be added as a system.

lostintheodyssey

Currently Offline

1,598

362 posts since 31/03/10

Recent Badges:

One Piece at a Time Add your first game to your collection.
4 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 4 years.
Site Veteran Has been a VGChartz member for over 5 years.
Leaving Limbo 100 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
1st Birthday Has been a VGChartz member for over 1 year.
12 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 12 years.

lostintheodyssey on 31 March 2010

Thank you!

NJ5

Currently Offline

69,544

14947 posts since 24/03/07

Recent Badges:

6 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 6 years.
The Nuts & Bolts Add a total of 25 games to your collection.
Making Friends 10 friends on gamrConnect.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.
Genocide 5,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
Making Progress Earned 50,000 gamrPoints

NJ5 on 31 March 2010

Squilliam said:
Most applications made today have been made X core aware in that they are designed to scale to as many cores as applicable.

Are you sure about that? I'm sure there are some applications, but to say "most" might be an overstatement.

There's also the issue that some applications are poorly optimized for more than one core, to the point that it's sometimes better to disable multi-core. That could also easily be the case for an application which tries to be smart-ass, scaling itself to more cores than it can correctly use.

Scaling should be very easy for embarassingly parallel stuff like server applications, in which case you're likely right. But for other cases I have my doubts.

My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Soleron

Currently Offline

47,213

9183 posts since 11/05/08

Recent Badges:

One Small 'Splosion Author of 100 forum threads.
4 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 4 years.
One Piece at a Time Add your first game to your collection.
9 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 9 years.
'Ello Princess! Awarded for signing up.
16 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 16 years.

Currently Playing:

StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty (PC)
Banjo-Tooie (N64)
Banjo-Kazooie (N64)

Soleron on 31 March 2010

NJ5, I would concur with "some" instead of "most".

If you benefit from more cores in a huge way, then AMD has some 8-core server chips at $266, or 12-cores at $744.

Squilliam

Currently Offline

94,810

17688 posts since 14/03/08

Recent Badges:

13 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 13 years.
Quite a Comeback Enter your first Prediction League event.
First Rung Of The Ladder Earned 10,000 gamrPoints
Site Veteran Has been a VGChartz member for over 5 years.
14 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 14 years.
Hit And Run 15 comments posted on VGChartz news articles.

Squilliam on 31 March 2010

NJ5 said:

Squilliam said:
Most applications made today have been made X core aware in that they are designed to scale to as many cores as applicable.

Are you sure about that? I'm sure there are some applications, but to say "most" might be an overstatement.

There's also the issue that some applications are poorly optimized for more than one core, to the point that it's sometimes better to disable multi-core. That could also easily be the case for an application which tries to be smart-ass, scaling itself to more cores than it can correctly use.

Scaling should be very easy for embarassingly parallel stuff like server applications, in which case you're likely right. But for other cases I have my doubts.

Sorry, I should have said most taxing software. Is that better?

Tease.