Anyone feel CPU [AT] benchmarks should include gaming and streaming since multi core cpu's are out?

tvdang7

Platinum Member
Jun 4, 2005
2,241
0
81
#1
As a person that just got a brand new ryzen7 system and lingering if coffee lake would have been the better path for gaming and streaming csgo,pubg, etc , I feel there simply isn't enough data out there for this topic. I was on the fence between 7700k and the ryzen 7, 99% of the time the 7700k wins but with the new popularity of streaming while gaming, the 7700k takes a sizable hit and dropped frames compared to the Ryzen 7 (horrible run on sentence sue me). I think streaming while gaming is now a mainstream and real life scenario that anandtech and all sites should be testing and holds more weight than a cinebench test. Thoughts?

EDIT found one review http://techreport.com/review/32642/intel-core-i7-8700k-cpu-reviewed/11
 
Aug 8, 2001
23,729
0
136
#2
The YouTube reviewers tend to test this more. I'm guessing we'll see more tests done since it's still early after launch, and the new Windows 10 Fall Creator's update just released which seems to favorably impact gaming performance.
 

tvdang7

Platinum Member
Jun 4, 2005
2,241
0
81
#3
The YouTube reviewers tend to test this more. I'm guessing we'll see more tests done since it's still early after launch, and the new Windows 10 Fall Creator's update just released which seems to favorably impact gaming performance.
I actually had some gaming issues last night where it felt like i was not getting anywhere near full gpu usage. I had to uninstall the creators update to return back to normal. Game mode didn't help either. Posted on reddit and a few others had similar issues.
 

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,628
85
106
#4
This just comes across as a "I've bought an 8 core processor and I want to justify my purchase" thread.

How many people actually stream while gaming, and do it seriously (so Nvidia built in stuff isn't good enough)? About 0.01% of people or less gaming on those machines I would have thought. For a standard performance review clearly most of us won't care about that.

What might be more interesting is a review looking at methods for gaming+streaming, the quality achieved, frame rate hit, what quality twitch/youtube actually broadcasts, etc - not just a processor review but any in-depth look into the current state of the technology. I like most people have no interest in streaming my games, but I would find that an interesting read.
 

Yakk

Golden Member
May 28, 2016
1,574
0
81
#5
I started streaming to see how it works, and for some reason a few people started watching. o_O

So I'm interested now, but so far just using my old Radeon card I get virtually no performance hit with the dedicated existing hardware on the card so not sure it makes a difference either way for me on core count just for streaming.
 

tvdang7

Platinum Member
Jun 4, 2005
2,241
0
81
#6
This just comes across as a "I've bought an 8 core processor and I want to justify my purchase" thread.

How many people actually stream while gaming, and do it seriously (so Nvidia built in stuff isn't good enough)? About 0.01% of people or less gaming on those machines I would have thought. For a standard performance review clearly most of us won't care about that.

What might be more interesting is a review looking at methods for gaming+streaming, the quality achieved, frame rate hit, what quality twitch/youtube actually broadcasts, etc - not just a processor review but any in-depth look into the current state of the technology. I like most people have no interest in streaming my games, but I would find that an interesting read.
Well aside from content creation, What else do you suggest we do to show some real world scenarios? or is benchmarking what the rest of the world does on their computer?
 
Last edited:

cfenton

Senior member
Jul 27, 2015
257
23
71
#7
I think the Techreport review explains why it's not that important for most people.

Although one might wonder why people are still making a hullabaloo about CPU encoding performance when hardware-accelerated game streaming is available from both major GPU software packages, the fact of the matter seems to be that the most demanding professionals still choose to use software encoding. The reason for this is that Twitch and other streaming services have restrictive bit rates for streamed content. GPU-accelerated services like GeForce Share (née Shadowplay) and Radeon ReLive make it easy to stream without affecting gaming performance that much, but they might not offer the highest-quality viewing experience to fans within the bounds of those bit rates. For achieving the best results possible, the name of the game is still software encoding with x264.
Unless you are trying to show the difference between settings in a game, having the absolute best image quality isn't that important. Since 99% of Youtube and Twitch videos are just people being idiots while playing a game, I'm sure GPU encoding is just fine.

That's not to say no one should evaluate the performance of CPUs at this task. I think someone should. It's another piece of data. However, it's only relevant for a very specific group of people, so if time is limited, I'd prefer reviewers focus on other things.
 

NTMBK

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2011
8,209
168
126
#8
I could not care less about streaming while I game, and I think 95% of gamers are the same.
 

OTG

Member
Aug 12, 2016
64
100
61
#9
I think game streaming is still pretty niche, and probably will stay that way, but having this much computing power really DOES open up a ton of possibilities for people who want to do new and interesting things with their computers.
It would be nice to see some reviewers (hopefully somebody credible like Anandtech) doing gaming + [another task] sort of reviews.
Things like mining monero with 4 cores, and still being able to use the computer for games or whatever, has the potential to allow somebody like me to afford a more powerful CPU and get something out of it other than just bragging rights.

What the possibilities are I'm not quite sure (I didn't 'get' the iphone or tablets either), but somebody is going to find a use for all this power and do something seriously cool with it.
Hopefully it'll be more interesting than just allowing people to consume more entertainment. Things like contributing processing power to scientific research or crypto mining could be a sort of gateway that gets more people thinking about more possibilities. I've personally learned a ton about how computers since I decided to set up a mining rig, and I would love to find more ways to apply this knowledge.
 

epsilon84

Senior member
Aug 29, 2010
931
104
136
#10
Gamers Nexus does streaming benchmarks, have a look at their Youtube channel

The OP does have a point that the 7700K does poorly at this against a Ryzen 7. In saying that, the 8700K does a lot better in this regard, as you would expect.
 
Oct 9, 1999
11,266
47
126
#11
Gamers Nexus does streaming benchmarks, have a look at their Youtube channel

The OP does have a point that the 7700K does poorly at this against a Ryzen 7. In saying that, the 8700K does a lot better in this regard, as you would expect.
For sure the 7700K is horrible CPU choice for streaming.
 

epsilon84

Senior member
Aug 29, 2010
931
104
136
#12
For sure the 7700K is horrible CPU choice for streaming.
Its not "horrible" in the sense that you can make it stream smoothly by adjusting CPU affinity values, but at the expense of your in game frame rate.

Ryzen just works better out of the box for streaming thanks to the extra cores and threads.

If streaming is really important for someone then Ryzen is a very viable option even when compared to Coffee Lake based setups.

However, regular (non streaming) gamers are still better off with CFL based systems unless an i5 8400 + Z370 mobo is beyond your budget.
 

kawi6rr

Senior member
Oct 17, 2013
522
23
116
#13
This just comes across as a "I've bought an 8 core processor and I want to justify my purchase" thread.
This just comes across as "you're out of touch and are a bit angry for some odd reason", the group I play with 3 to 4 out of the 12 stream.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
65
126
#14
This just comes across as "you're out of touch and are a bit angry for some odd reason", the group I play with 3 to 4 out of the 12 stream.
O
I could not care less about streaming while I game, and I think 95% of gamers are the same.
Yea, I agree. To answer the original question: No.

I also don't understand those who want to load up their computer with cpu intensive operations while gaming. How much can one game, maybe 4 hours per day? That leaves 20 hours to do everything else.
 

IEC

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,516
259
136
#15
Two reasons why streamers use OBS:
1) More features, like overlays (e.g. for new subs, donations) and PiP. nV has some very basic functions that don't really cut the mustard, while ReLive just plain sucks in this regard.
2) Better quality for a given bitrate. 3500 CBR is pretty much the max you can send to Twitch ingest servers so software encoding is very useful in this regard.

Two good examples of OBS Twitch streams for PUBG are JoshOG and shroud.
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,698
70
106
#16
OBS does support nvenc though and there is also an extra version for amd hardware encoding,just needing or wanting OBS does not justify high CPU usage.
Also if you do it right and don't expect miracles you don't need all that much to stream with CPU cores.
 

ZGR

Golden Member
Oct 26, 2012
1,789
34
106
#17
Not caring about something doesn't make the benchmark or use case invalid LOL.

Streaming is growing and quad cores quickly show their age when streaming at high bit rates and gaming at high frame rates.

OBS is absolutely the way to go and I would love to see some benchmarks.
 
Last edited:

Ozzyrulez

Junior Member
Mar 21, 2017
16
0
51
#18
I love the "I don't like/do it, so therefore it is useless/dumb mentality. I don't stream but I would love to see more benchmarks for multitasking and usage cases that utilize all the power a system has.
 

kawi6rr

Senior member
Oct 17, 2013
522
23
116
#19
I love the "I don't like/do it, so therefore it is useless/dumb mentality. I don't stream but I would love to see more benchmarks for multitasking and usage cases that utilize all the power a system has.
Agreed, I don't stream and don't care much about it but I would like to see some benchmarks on it. More info the better when purchasing products.
 

NTMBK

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2011
8,209
168
126
#20
I love the "I don't like/do it, so therefore it is useless/dumb mentality. I don't stream but I would love to see more benchmarks for multitasking and usage cases that utilize all the power a system has.
I prefer to see the hardware fit the use case, rather than have the use case distorted to fit the hardware.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
65
126
#21
I love the "I don't like/do it, so therefore it is useless/dumb mentality. I don't stream but I would love to see more benchmarks for multitasking and usage cases that utilize all the power a system has.
I prefer to see the hardware fit the use case, rather than have the use case distorted to fit the hardware.
Yea, even the thread title has this perspective.
 

Zstream

Diamond Member
Oct 24, 2005
3,166
2
116
#22
I prefer to see the hardware fit the use case, rather than have the use case distorted to fit the hardware.
Of course you wouldn't want to see anything used to show AMD's strong points. That's like Anandtech running gaming benchmarks on a Threadripper review, useless, and not very telling of the processor. Many people multi-task when gaming. Not everyone can "zone" in on a game, and do nothing else for hours on end.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
65
126
#23
Of course you wouldn't want to see anything used to show AMD's strong points. That's like Anandtech running gaming benchmarks on a Threadripper review, useless, and not very telling of the processor. Many people multi-task when gaming. Not everyone can "zone" in on a game, and do nothing else for hours on end.
Or one could just as easily say streaming is an attempt to show a cpu that is slower in gaming in a better light.
 

ZGR

Golden Member
Oct 26, 2012
1,789
34
106
#24
I prefer to see the hardware fit the use case, rather than have the use case distorted to fit the hardware.
I completely agree. Streaming has become a profession for many people and is incredibly popular. Let us see benchmarks fit the use case for this and not distort anything further.


Or one could just as easily say streaming is an attempt to show a cpu that is slower in gaming in a better light.
If you don't stream then why does it matter? This is for people who stream at incredibly high bit rates at 1080p60 and beyond. Streaming can be an INCREDIBLY profitable job for those at the top. They want the best performance and they don't care if it is AMD or Intel.

This is not about epeen, not about skewing gaming performance, not about distorting reality to show one camp is better than the other, but to show how streaming affects CPU core performance. I want to know more.
 

epsilon84

Senior member
Aug 29, 2010
931
104
136
#25

Streaming benchmarks at 2:25. I'm quite surprised how well the i5s stream, would have thought being thread limited the framerates would tank but that isn't the case, in fact the i5 8400 is still producing higher fps than an overclocked 1800X @ 4GHz!
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS