ssj12 said:
This is because the games arent coded to work with the new hardware. Remember Intel isnt using an FSB anymore meaning that data is handled differently. Wait for game updates and new driver updates than things will be different.
|
Any 'recoding' to take advantage of QPI (and I doubt it's possible; it's game-type workloads that are the problem, not programming practices) will benefit AMD's HyperTransport in equal amounts. Also, I've yet to see game updates that include major code rewrites to support processor features; no one did it for DirectX 10.1, or one -> two cores, or a new version of SSE. What do you mean by driver updates? Graphics?
I'm not saying Core i7 isn't theoretically stronger than Core 2, but Intel just didn't design it for desktop loads. QPI and SMT actually hurt it on the desktop, the same as HT and NUMA hurt AMD on the desktop but did the inverse for the server.
| NNN2004 said: for some reasons i dont trust AMD processors. |
No one has had any concerns about the integrity of AMD processors since the early 1990s. Their lists of errata (processor glitches) are similar in severity and number to Intel. Even the Phenom TLB bug is matched by a similar one in Nehalem.
You're just a victim of Intel Inside, I'm afraid.
Soleron said:
Any 'recoding' to take advantage of QPI (and I doubt it's possible; it's game-type workloads that are the problem, not programming practices) will benefit AMD's HyperTransport in equal amounts. Also, I've yet to see game updates that include major code rewrites to support processor features; no one did it for DirectX 10.1, or one -> two cores, or a new version of SSE. What do you mean by driver updates? Graphics? I'm not saying Core i7 isn't theoretically stronger than Core 2, but Intel just didn't design it for desktop loads. QPI and SMT actually hurt it on the desktop, the same as HT and NUMA hurt AMD on the desktop but did the inverse for the server.
|
Most games still aren't multithreaded, or at least not mutithreaded well. Until that time comes a dual core will still be a better bet than quads for gaming, not just from a cost/performance standpoint but also because duals will overclock higher.
QPI will make no inherent difference for games, and software isn't going to be 'recoded' for it.
Leo-j said: If a dvd for a pc game holds what? Crysis at 3000p or something, why in the world cant a blu-ray disc do the same?
ssj12 said: Player specific decoders are nothing more than specialized GPUs. Gran Turismo is the trust driving simulator of them all.
"Why do they call it the xbox 360? Because when you see it, you'll turn 360 degrees and walk away"
In the age of 360 -> PC ports its actually better to have a Tri Core than a Dual Core CPU. 3 cores on 360, 3 cores on PC = perfect match. Check out the GTA IV system requirements for an example.
Tease.
| Squilliam said: In the age of 360 -> PC ports its actually better to have a Tri Core than a Dual Core CPU. 3 cores on 360, 3 cores on PC = perfect match. Check out the GTA IV system requirements for an example. |
L4D is a PC -> 360 port and it runs better on a tri-core processor. So I believe it doesnt matter if the 360 is involved at all. It is a matter of the developer.
@SSJ but when its the other way around, Xbox 360 -> PC ports they do seem to use that third core but no more.
Tease.
| Squilliam said: @SSJ but when its the other way around, Xbox 360 -> PC ports they do seem to use that third core but no more. |
and how often does the PC get a 360 port? 90% of the 360's line up is PC to 360 ports. Unless you mean that horrid pot called GTA4 which needs a quad core to somewhat run ok.
| Slimebeast said: Go AMD! My next CPU upgrade will most likely be to a Phenom II. |
my next rig will be a Nehalem or Westmore
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
