Does the CPU matter in gaming anymore?

[Phynaz]

Why yes, it does!

http://techreport.com/articles.x/23246/1

TL;DR version: Bulldozer is slower than Nehalem

 

[AtenRa]

What graphics card did they used in the review ??

 

[AtenRa]

Quite a few PC enthusiasts will be interested in the first class of CPUs tested, which is headlined by the Core i5-3470 at $184.......The closest competing offering from AMD is the FX-6200 at $155, a six-core part based on the Bulldozer architecture.

Really ??

FX6100 at $109,99
FX8120 at $149,99
FX8150 at $179,99

 

[exar333]

Really ??

FX6100 at $109,99
FX8120 at $149,99
FX8150 at $179,99

I do agree somewhat, but the 6200 is $149 at the egg. Why is this so much more than the 6100!!??

 

[AtenRa]

FX6200 at $132,99

Also, newegg has the Core i5 3470 at $199,99

edit: i dont know why you guys quoting the newegg prices ?? it seams to me they have the highest prices most of the time.

 

[Haserath]

Battlefield 3- Bulldozer approved

 

[guskline]

This report pretty much states what I'm experiencing with a 8150, Won't wow you like the Intel chips. It just "chugs along" like its name:sneaky:

 

[Hatisherrif]

This report pretty much states what I'm experiencing with a 8150, Won't wow you like the Intel chips. It just "chugs along" like its name:sneaky:

I'm sure it would wow the i5 in many multi-threaded situations - compression, encryption, video creation etc. But I do believe it should get a spanking from a higher end Intel in gaming. It's simply true, at least when it comes to Phenom II (which seems to have varying performance in relation to Bulldozer).

 

[Olikan]

Why yes, it does!

http://techreport.com/articles.x/23246/1

TL;DR version: Bulldozer is slower than Nehalem

yes, of course it does

...the problem is it worth the price?

NO...save it to buy a better GPU

 

[frozentundra123456]

Battlefield 3- Bulldozer approved

Really??? Didn't you mean "the only game in which it is even competitive"?

 

[frozentundra123456]

yes, of course it does

...the problem is it worth the price?

NO...save it to buy a better GPU

Wow, I wondered how the AMD fans would spin this. Back to the old excuse "AMD is good enough, spend the money on something else."

I could accept this philosophy if an AMD cpu was several hundred dollars cheaper. However, to me, getting an Intel CPU IS worth the price. If you are building a 1000 dollar gaming rig, what is 50 or even 100 dollars when you get better performance and a more future proof rig.

 

[exar333]

FX6200 at $132,99

Also, newegg has the Core i5 3470 at $199,99

edit: i dont know why you guys quoting the newegg prices ?? it seams to me they have the highest prices most of the time.

They often fluctuate to reflect market prices. Quoting the 'absolute' cheapest price to prove a point against an article is more misleading IMHO. The article was just finding processors close to each other in price. I agree it might not be 100% valid, but prices on relatively cheap CPUs fluctuate considerably.

 

[AtenRa]

They often fluctuate to reflect market prices. Quoting the 'absolute' cheapest price to prove a point against an article is more misleading IMHO. The article was just finding processors close to each other in price. I agree it might not be 100% valid, but prices on relatively cheap CPUs fluctuate considerably.

No im not saying to only quote the cheapest price, i do my self quote from newegg.
But if we take newegg prices the Core i5 3470 is at $199,99 and FX6200 at $149,99 when FX8150 is at $189,99.

Any way, did anyone found out what GPU they used in the review ??

 

[frozentundra123456]

No im not saying to only quote the cheapest price, i do my self quote from newegg.
But if we take newegg prices the Core i5 3470 is at $199,99 and FX6200 at $149,99 when FX8150 is at $189,99.

Any way, did anyone found out what GPU they used in the review ??

It was a HD7950 3GB. It says that in the blue box near the bottom.

 

[njdevilsfan87]

If you are building a 1000 dollar gaming rig, what is 50 or even 100 dollars when you get better performance and a more future proof rig.

I agree. I spend more on a CPU so I don't have to upgrade it 2 years later. And unless you're building a budget system, there's no point in buying a higher end GPU if it won't be fully utilized.

 

[AtenRa]

It was a HD7950 3GB. It says that in the blue box near the bottom.

thanks

 

[JAG87]

That multitasking chart is awful lmao

 

[AtenRa]

Hmm, they run Batman AC in DX-9 mode and they haven't used any AA filters on Crysis 2.
Also, it seams to me they just run the Single Player mode in BF3. That was the only game of the four used that they should tested in MP mode to really check if the CPU plays a significant part in Gaming.

 

[Olikan]

Wow, I wondered how the AMD fans would spin this. Back to the old excuse "AMD is good enough, spend the money on something else."

I could accept this philosophy if an AMD cpu was several hundred dollars cheaper. However, to me, getting an Intel CPU IS worth the price. If you are building a 1000 dollar gaming rig, what is 50 or even 100 dollars when you get better performance and a more future proof rig.

errr...did i said anyhing about amd/intel there?

no...just my opinion that cpus at gaming gives very marginal FPS/$$...

i would rather spend 500 bucks on gpu and 200 for cpu...than 350 for each

 

[sefsefsefsef]

Really??? Didn't you mean "the only game in which it is even competitive"?

It's the only game where in a blind test I bet nobody would be able to reliably tell which system was using an AMD chip and which was using an Intel. Both Intel and AMD offer smooth experiences in that game.

That's the whole point of their testing methodology, to look past the average FPS that is often reported in reviews, and quantify instead how "smooth" and how "choppy" a game feels to play. In BF3, Intel and AMD both basically have the same smoothness of frame latencies. In other games, both probably offer acceptable experiences, but it would be a lot easier to tell with the naked eye, "this system is smoother than this system."

 

[Fallengod]

I dont think its news to anyone that a GPU is what provides the highest fps differences in gaming....I mean, duh.

However CPU's are the next priority in line there. When I upgraded to my current i5-2500k from my older Intel C2D E6400 @ 3ghz, I noticed a decent fps/performance bump for sure. It does make a difference.

 

[toyota]

of course the cpu matters. they tested all good cpus that were at least dual cores with HT if not quad cores or better. even there then were noticeable differences from top to bottom.

 

[Aikouka]

Also, it seams to me they just run the Single Player mode in BF3. That was the only game of the four used that they should tested in MP mode to really check if the CPU plays a significant part in Gaming.

Good luck getting a repeatable test with that!

 

[felang]

Battlefield 3- Bulldozer approved

Single Player maybe... multiplayer is a whole different animal.

 

[Vdubchaos]

PC Hardware prices will be hitting rock bottom as gaming industry continues to stand still.