5 ms·

Meanwhile I have an i5-9600k in a case that is smaller than a Playstation 5 using a cooler that is only a bit bigger than those old stock coolers. It comfortabl

Meanwhile I have an i5-9600k in a case that is smaller than a Playstation 5 using a cooler that is only a bit bigger than those old stock coolers. It comfortably idles around 40c and peaks at 70c. What are people even doing on these newest CPUs? Video rendering? Servers? Because if they are playing games it is a huge waste of power.

dbspin 4y ago
Not sure how this generalises, but for video editing - less rendering, which is already fast for most workloads, but the actual tasks of editing, grading etc - CPUs are still nowhere near fast enough. You can easily bring a modern machine to its knees realtime editing 4K or 6K H264 / H265 video with grading at native resolution. Let alone 8K video. Dedicated pipelines for decompressing various video codecs on the fly (including ProRes) are part of the reason Macbook Pros sell so well for video tasks. Another is that you can run them unplugged without slowdown, which is incredibly useful for video editors (good luck editing on a train, plane or back seat of a cab with a windows laptop). All that said, DaVinci Resolve which is increasingly taking over from Premiere for many commercial editors, is more GPU than CPU bound. Lots of sales of the current fastest GPU Nvidia's RTX 4090 to this market.
grogenaut 4y ago
Why is rendering video (likely for entertainment) not a waste of power, where playing video games (entertainment) is?
- izzydata 4y ago
  Ah, that is not what I meant. Such a powerful CPU is a "waste" in a computer meant for gaming because it can never be utilized. It will never be the bottleneck of such a system and you can run your games just as well on a less powerful CPU. The energy used for such activities is another question.
  - grogenaut 4y ago
    Aah. Kk thanks for reply. I'm a dev so I like having those ghz around for other uses as well.
  - kitsunesoba 4y ago
    It depends on the game, settings the user is running it at, and desired framerate and resolution. A number of games are partially CPU-bound and not well multithreaded, which means the only way to get them consistently at or above certain framerates is to pump IPC, which usually means buying the higher end CPUs.
    - skyyler 4y ago
      Are there any games out right now that an i5-9600k would struggle with?
      - izzydata 4y ago
        I was using about 60% of my cpu running Cyberpunk 2077 at 1440p 120fps. Maybe if you wanted to run it at 8k using an RTX 4090.
      - kitsunesoba 4y ago
        There are some that won't consistently stay above certain framerates in some circumstances. World of Warcraft for instance performs tangibly better on newer CPUs in settings like 40v40 team fights in battlegrounds for example due to how CPU-bound it is — on a 9600k it'll struggle to stay above 120FPS and occasionally dip below 60FPS.
      - Scramblejams 4y ago
        DCS[0] in multiplayer. Horribly single-threaded at the moment, no CPU on the planet is good enough for a really busy map, running a bunch of detailed flight and systems models. They’re working on it, but they’ve been working on it for years. Typical small market development constraints. [0] https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/ https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/
      - 4y ago
BoorishBears 4y ago
If you ran a newer CPU at the effective performance of a 9600k you could probably get away with a passive cooler. A last-gen i5 mobile processor outperforms at 9600k with a 45W TDP. People make a ton of noise about the efficiency of processors that are explicitly designed to be the hotrods of desktop computing: meanwhile we've also seen the bottom end get significantly faster over the years. Conversely, the floor for TDPs have barely risen.
rkagerer 4y ago
Some games are still single-thread CPU bound, eg. KSP (even after the multithreading enhancements were implemented my understanding and anecdotal sense is most of the bottlenecking math is still sequential in one thread).

dbspin 4y ago

Not sure how this generalises, but for video editing - less rendering, which is already fast for most workloads, but the actual tasks of editing, grading etc - CPUs are still nowhere near fast enough. You can easily bring a modern machine to its knees realtime editing 4K or 6K H264 / H265 video with grading at native resolution. Let alone 8K video. Dedicated pipelines for decompressing various video codecs on the fly (including ProRes) are part of the reason Macbook Pros sell so well for video tasks. Another is that you can run them unplugged without slowdown, which is incredibly useful for video editors (good luck editing on a train, plane or back seat of a cab with a windows laptop). All that said, DaVinci Resolve which is increasingly taking over from Premiere for many commercial editors, is more GPU than CPU bound. Lots of sales of the current fastest GPU Nvidia's RTX 4090 to this market.

grogenaut 4y ago

Why is rendering video (likely for entertainment) not a waste of power, where playing video games (entertainment) is?

izzydata 4y ago
Ah, that is not what I meant. Such a powerful CPU is a "waste" in a computer meant for gaming because it can never be utilized. It will never be the bottleneck of such a system and you can run your games just as well on a less powerful CPU. The energy used for such activities is another question.
- grogenaut 4y ago
  Aah. Kk thanks for reply. I'm a dev so I like having those ghz around for other uses as well.
- kitsunesoba 4y ago
  It depends on the game, settings the user is running it at, and desired framerate and resolution. A number of games are partially CPU-bound and not well multithreaded, which means the only way to get them consistently at or above certain framerates is to pump IPC, which usually means buying the higher end CPUs.
  - skyyler 4y ago
    Are there any games out right now that an i5-9600k would struggle with?
    - izzydata 4y ago
      I was using about 60% of my cpu running Cyberpunk 2077 at 1440p 120fps. Maybe if you wanted to run it at 8k using an RTX 4090.
    - kitsunesoba 4y ago
      There are some that won't consistently stay above certain framerates in some circumstances. World of Warcraft for instance performs tangibly better on newer CPUs in settings like 40v40 team fights in battlegrounds for example due to how CPU-bound it is — on a 9600k it'll struggle to stay above 120FPS and occasionally dip below 60FPS.
    - Scramblejams 4y ago
      DCS[0] in multiplayer. Horribly single-threaded at the moment, no CPU on the planet is good enough for a really busy map, running a bunch of detailed flight and systems models. They’re working on it, but they’ve been working on it for years. Typical small market development constraints. [0] https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/ https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/
    - 4y ago

BoorishBears 4y ago

If you ran a newer CPU at the effective performance of a 9600k you could probably get away with a passive cooler. A last-gen i5 mobile processor outperforms at 9600k with a 45W TDP. People make a ton of noise about the efficiency of processors that are explicitly designed to be the hotrods of desktop computing: meanwhile we've also seen the bottom end get significantly faster over the years. Conversely, the floor for TDPs have barely risen.

rkagerer 4y ago

Some games are still single-thread CPU bound, eg. KSP (even after the multithreading enhancements were implemented my understanding and anecdotal sense is most of the bottlenecking math is still sequential in one thread).