3 ms·

newer AAA games/3d drivers lead to a pretty nice workload split over multiple cores really. Battlegrounds was coded in a rush and inexpertly so but it still lig

newer AAA games/3d drivers lead to a pretty nice workload split over multiple cores really. Battlegrounds was coded in a rush and inexpertly so but it still lights up 4 cores pretty well. Probably in part due to drivers and unreal engine helping out even if the game programmers aren't explicitly working at it.

dragontamer 8y ago
Oh yeah, SOME games are certainly multithreaded well. Doom, Battlegrounds, and more. DX12 apparently helped a lot with that. But many games are still single-thread bound (despite being multithreaded). As such, Gamers should still prefer single-thread performance.
- laythea 8y ago
  Games that are single thread bound are not maximising their potential on the common multi-core CPUs. Not many games strictly dictate sequential computations of the numerous things a game has to calculate. Gamer's who prefer cutting edge performance should prefer multi-thread performance.
  - paulmd 8y ago
    In almost all cases, modern processors have enough multi-threaded performance to play optimized (multi-threaded) games acceptably. It's the single-threaded ones that will be challenging to run, and it's those challenging tasks that you should optimize your system around. Optimizing for MT-heavy games is the gaming equivalent of premature optimization - everybody can run Doom at a million FPS, but Fallout 4 or PUBG shit all over every system and you'll be begging for every frame you can get. You can "prefer" whatever you want but developers don't care. This site of all places knows that time-to-market is what really matters. If you want to play those titles, you have to deal with it. Either optimize for the shitty titles, accept that you're going to be losing a fairly significant amount of frames (the 2700X is behind as much as 30% in some titles), or don't play those titles.
    - laythea 8y ago
      I'm not talking about getting the same done, different ways. Ie multi vs single threaded. I mean that if the software is implemented in the correct manner, "more can be done" by utilizing multiple threads.
- TylerE 8y ago
  I would say not just SOME but MOST, if you look at recent releases. As of PS4/XB1 single threading isn't really viable for an AAA title. PC ports are generally seeing the benefits of that.
  - paulmd 8y ago
    People have been saying that for 5 years (which is, in fact, how long XB1/PS4 have been on the market). Single-threaded performance is still the dominant factor in gaming performance. Games make use of up to 6 threads, but single-threaded performance still determines overall framerate to a large extent. Games are not exempt from Amdahl's law: as long as you've got enough threads to offload work, it comes down to the single-threaded portion of the workload. The faster you can run the main game loop the faster the game runs.

dragontamer 8y ago

Oh yeah, SOME games are certainly multithreaded well. Doom, Battlegrounds, and more. DX12 apparently helped a lot with that. But many games are still single-thread bound (despite being multithreaded). As such, Gamers should still prefer single-thread performance.

laythea 8y ago
Games that are single thread bound are not maximising their potential on the common multi-core CPUs. Not many games strictly dictate sequential computations of the numerous things a game has to calculate. Gamer's who prefer cutting edge performance should prefer multi-thread performance.
- paulmd 8y ago
  In almost all cases, modern processors have enough multi-threaded performance to play optimized (multi-threaded) games acceptably. It's the single-threaded ones that will be challenging to run, and it's those challenging tasks that you should optimize your system around. Optimizing for MT-heavy games is the gaming equivalent of premature optimization - everybody can run Doom at a million FPS, but Fallout 4 or PUBG shit all over every system and you'll be begging for every frame you can get. You can "prefer" whatever you want but developers don't care. This site of all places knows that time-to-market is what really matters. If you want to play those titles, you have to deal with it. Either optimize for the shitty titles, accept that you're going to be losing a fairly significant amount of frames (the 2700X is behind as much as 30% in some titles), or don't play those titles.
  - laythea 8y ago
    I'm not talking about getting the same done, different ways. Ie multi vs single threaded. I mean that if the software is implemented in the correct manner, "more can be done" by utilizing multiple threads.
TylerE 8y ago
I would say not just SOME but MOST, if you look at recent releases. As of PS4/XB1 single threading isn't really viable for an AAA title. PC ports are generally seeing the benefits of that.
- paulmd 8y ago
  People have been saying that for 5 years (which is, in fact, how long XB1/PS4 have been on the market). Single-threaded performance is still the dominant factor in gaming performance. Games make use of up to 6 threads, but single-threaded performance still determines overall framerate to a large extent. Games are not exempt from Amdahl's law: as long as you've got enough threads to offload work, it comes down to the single-threaded portion of the workload. The faster you can run the main game loop the faster the game runs.