4 ms·
In my experience, most modern games aren't CPU-bound anymore; more and more work is being pushed onto the GPU with every generation. My brother has a quad-core
by RussianCow 10y ago
In my experience, most modern games aren't CPU-bound anymore; more and more work is being pushed onto the GPU with every generation. My brother has a quad-core AMD CPU (don't remember which) with a powerful GPU, and his CPU is very rarely the bottleneck—there are few games he can't max out at 1080. Also, according to AMD's benchmarks, the Ryzen CPUs are very close to Intel's in single-threaded performance.
- IAmGraydon 10y agoThis. Gaming hasn't been bottlenecked by the CPU in a long time. Anything from an i5 up performs pretty much the same with the same GPU.
- s_m_t 10y agoAnd you'll only be bottlenecked by the GPU if you want to play AAA titles at high settings or at a resolution beyond 1080p. I'm still using an ATI Radeon HD 5770 and I haven't seen a compelling reason to upgrade my card.
- kayoone 10y agoEntirely depends on the game.
- ionised 10y agoSOme games still will require a beasty CPU. Total War is one example.
- cma 10y agoIt is a big deal in VR, at 90Hz, two eyes, you have 3x the draw calls of a game running at 60Hz. There are some optimizations to reduce the per-eye overhead, but it is still a lot. Sony's headset can run at native 120Hz, increasing things more, but not too many games are using that mode.
- Retric 10y ago4k at 60fps is 498 million pixels per second, Rift @ 90FPS is 233 million pixels per second. GPU's can deal with making 2 images without meaningful CPU overhead. The real issue is stutter and latency not CPU or GPU GFLOPS.
- Arelius 10y agoPixels/second aren't a very useful metric when speaking about CPU performance. Your comparison seems to show that CPU performance might be much more important than GPU perf for VR. Also, you're correct that GPU's can play all sorts of tricks to get multiple projected views for low CPU-overhead. But that is with significant software support. Otherwise VR will have to build twice the amount of framebuffers/frame as a single view game.
- cma 10y agoWe're talking about draw calls on the CPU, not pixel fill. Still wrong about Rift vs 4K though. Due to the lens unwarping you have to render to a much larger render target to get native screen res. About 1.7x more pixels than he native res. > GPU's can deal with making 2 images without meaningful CPU overhead. I meant to say that with this "There are some optimizations to reduce the per-eye overhead, but it is still a lot." But I didn't word it well. I didn't mean per-eye overhead was a lot after the optimizations, but that the increase in CPU usage was still a lot in spite of them due to the higher update rates.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- kayoone 10y agoPhysics heavy games at lower resolutions can still get a lot of benefit out of faster cores. Battlefield 1/4 multiplayer as an example. The Division is another game that benefits greatly from CPU power. Another thing is that many enthusiasts nowadays go for high refresh rate monitors and at 1080p/1440p you can still be CPU bottlenecked if you are shooting for >144FPS on a 144Hz screen.