Even with Conroe on the way, are CPU's dead for gaming?

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
The gaming market composes of a very tiny share of the overall computer component market. To think that gaming is the only arena that justifies the use of a high performance CPU is foolish. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure if gaming didn't exist, there would be a noticable hit on revenues on many companies.. but, for the majority, gaming is a fraction.
There is still a need to further develop CPU technology. Better CPUS will come to the market whether gaming fully needs it or not.

Removing gaming the from equation, what is the point of a fast CPU then for the typical consumer? Does joe-nobody really need a 2GHZ Pentium M just to hookup his iCrap to his computer? Or to look at his kiddie porn collection? What about soccermom sally? Does she really need all that speed to look up recipies and how to deal with her failing marriage? I think not. They need to work on making high quality, low power usage computers that are affordable. They need to stop putting such expensive processors in these systems with friggen integrated graphics, even if the person doesn't game, they'll still benefit from a dedicated video card. They should be having $200 video cards and $50 processors because the performance benefit from a $200 processor isn't really that much anymore..

That wouldn't work as processor cost 40-50US to make in the first place, they aren't givne them away you know.

Are you sure about that?

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
The gaming market composes of a very tiny share of the overall computer component market. To think that gaming is the only arena that justifies the use of a high performance CPU is foolish. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure if gaming didn't exist, there would be a noticable hit on revenues on many companies.. but, for the majority, gaming is a fraction.
There is still a need to further develop CPU technology. Better CPUS will come to the market whether gaming fully needs it or not.

Removing gaming the from equation, what is the point of a fast CPU then for the typical consumer? Does joe-nobody really need a 2GHZ Pentium M just to hookup his iCrap to his computer? Or to look at his kiddie porn collection? What about soccermom sally? Does she really need all that speed to look up recipies and how to deal with her failing marriage? I think not. They need to work on making high quality, low power usage computers that are affordable. They need to stop putting such expensive processors in these systems with friggen integrated graphics, even if the person doesn't game, they'll still benefit from a dedicated video card. They should be having $200 video cards and $50 processors because the performance benefit from a $200 processor isn't really that much anymore..

That wouldn't work as processor cost 40-50US to make in the first place, they aren't givne them away you know.

Are you sure about that?

Yes, I am quite sure on this. The only reason to make a power efficient procesor is if you could charge a PREMIUM on them rather then less money lol.

 

[Viditor]

Actually, $40-50 is just the cost of the silicon after yields for a 144 mm2 chip. It doesn't even take into account the labour, R&D, fixed costs, etc...

 

[FelixDeCat]

Of course not.

 

[wpeng]

So far, the main thing that requires a fast CPU in computer gaming seems to be running a bunch of mods. Everything else seems to be based on people wanting to do encoding. I, being a joe gamer, need only to play games. And why don't I buy an Xbox then? Because I like computer-style RPGs more and I like computer-style controls better. There are some games that are not co-developed as console games that I highly value. Also, as a previous poster mentioned, I can add mods quite a bit easier with computer games (although I never plan on using even close to 128 mods at a time).

So, for joe gamer, the best option would be get a sub $100 processor and the best dang video card I can get, right? That's essentially the main point of the OP, I believe. That, or he's just curious.

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: wpeng
So, for joe gamer, the best option would be get a sub $100 processor and the best dang video card I can get, right? That's essentially the main point of the OP, I believe. That, or he's just curious.

With the exception of the Celeron, I'd say yes. There ARE some signs of HyperThreading and Dual-Core starting to make a noticable difference though. It's new - but definately happening. If you're buying now - make sure dual-core is an option either now or later.

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
The gaming market composes of a very tiny share of the overall computer component market. To think that gaming is the only arena that justifies the use of a high performance CPU is foolish. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure if gaming didn't exist, there would be a noticable hit on revenues on many companies.. but, for the majority, gaming is a fraction.
There is still a need to further develop CPU technology. Better CPUS will come to the market whether gaming fully needs it or not.

Removing gaming the from equation, what is the point of a fast CPU then for the typical consumer? Does joe-nobody really need a 2GHZ Pentium M just to hookup his iCrap to his computer? Or to look at his kiddie porn collection? What about soccermom sally? Does she really need all that speed to look up recipies and how to deal with her failing marriage? I think not. They need to work on making high quality, low power usage computers that are affordable. They need to stop putting such expensive processors in these systems with friggen integrated graphics, even if the person doesn't game, they'll still benefit from a dedicated video card. They should be having $200 video cards and $50 processors because the performance benefit from a $200 processor isn't really that much anymore..

That wouldn't work as processor cost 40-50US to make in the first place, they aren't givne them away you know.

Are you sure about that?

Yes, I am quite sure on this. The only reason to make a power efficient procesor is if you could charge a PREMIUM on them rather then less money lol.

Let's see, I got a frys combo deal of a sempron socket 754 processor (2800+ 64bit) and motherboard, all for $70, that sounds like less than $50 to me...

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: Viditor
Actually, $40-50 is just the cost of the silicon after yields for a 144 mm2 chip. It doesn't even take into account the labour, R&D, fixed costs, etc...

Silicon is really that expensive? I find that hard to believe, then agian they're making chips that are far faster than their own good.

 

[NanoStuff]

Originally posted by: josh6079
What does a good processor do anymore for gaming?

Two words and a letter:

Flight Simulator X

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
The gaming market composes of a very tiny share of the overall computer component market. To think that gaming is the only arena that justifies the use of a high performance CPU is foolish. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure if gaming didn't exist, there would be a noticable hit on revenues on many companies.. but, for the majority, gaming is a fraction.
There is still a need to further develop CPU technology. Better CPUS will come to the market whether gaming fully needs it or not.

Removing gaming the from equation, what is the point of a fast CPU then for the typical consumer? Does joe-nobody really need a 2GHZ Pentium M just to hookup his iCrap to his computer? Or to look at his kiddie porn collection? What about soccermom sally? Does she really need all that speed to look up recipies and how to deal with her failing marriage? I think not. They need to work on making high quality, low power usage computers that are affordable. They need to stop putting such expensive processors in these systems with friggen integrated graphics, even if the person doesn't game, they'll still benefit from a dedicated video card. They should be having $200 video cards and $50 processors because the performance benefit from a $200 processor isn't really that much anymore..

That wouldn't work as processor cost 40-50US to make in the first place, they aren't givne them away you know.

Are you sure about that?

Yes, I am quite sure on this. The only reason to make a power efficient procesor is if you could charge a PREMIUM on them rather then less money lol.

Let's see, I got a frys combo deal of a sempron socket 754 processor (2800+ 64bit) and motherboard, all for $70, that sounds like less than $50 to me...

There comes a point where you have to move inventory out the door. Not to mention temporary deals that take a loss now to drive demand up on the product.