3 ms·
I would not count on this being great for gaming. Already the current threadripper is slower in games than a regular Ryzen processor or Intel i5/i7, slower base
by onli 8y ago
I would not count on this being great for gaming. Already the current threadripper is slower in games than a regular Ryzen processor or Intel i5/i7, slower base and turbo clock and added memory latency won't help with that.
- rubber_duck 8y agoIt would still be great - just not as good as some alternatives. But if you're doing development spinning up 32 cores is a very realistic proposition (compilers are good at parallelizing work, especially on big projects, spinning up dev cluster locally, etc.) - so you're getting a top productivity machine that can game - if you can afford it and are not interested in chasing gaming benchmarks then I don't see how it wouldn't be great.
- chrisper 8y agoAlso virtualmachines!
- UK-Al05 8y agoIt doesn't have to be great. It just has to be good enough.
- josefx 8y agoIs it actually slower or is it just the good old Intel compiler at work again? Binaries compiled with it have great performance on Intel chips, but perform a vendor id check and slow down on non Intel chips. As long as Intel CPUs remain dominant game developers will continue to use it.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- onli 8y agoIt really is slower. In games it is slower than AMD Ryzen processors, no compiler manipulation here. It is also to be expected with a lower clock and higher memory latency.