Getting to the bottom of the bottleneck question.

[AzN]

Originally posted by: apoppin

I could probably name them on the top of my head and still wouldn't fit into my 5 fingers

You must have a lot more than five fingers; i thought you said "Asian", not "alien"
---[sorry =O]

There are more than you suspect; why just name what is released this year?
.. see if anyone can add to it:

Supreme Commander
Company of Heroes
Source Engine games
FEAR series
Demigod
Alan Wake
Unreal3 engine games
GTA:IV
World in Conflict
Lost Planet
Empire Total War [with the next patch]

From my own 13-game benchmark review, a reader summed it up:

the Q9550 (at similar clockspeed to) beats the E8600?s minimum framerates in COD4, UT3, Lost Planet, HL2: LC, FEAR, ET: QW, WiC, FC2, and PT Boats. The two chips, for the most part, tie in the games Stalker, Crysis, and X3. The only game where the quad loses is Call of Juarez.

Of course, you may argue that, "dual is good enough"
.. OK .. but we see progress as games on that list do take advantage of multi-core


EDIT:
i found a list:
http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=smp64_apps

Games
Supreme Commander ? two or more cores
Alan Wake ? two or more cores / DX10
Bet On Soldier: Blood Sport ? 64bit
BioShock ? two or more cores / DX10
Codename: Panzers (Phase one) ? 64bit
Colin McRae Rally 2005 ? 64bit
Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay ? 64bit
Dreadnought ? 64bit
Far Cry ? 64bit
Fahrenheit ? 64bit
Half-Life 2 ? 64bit
Lost Coast ? 64bit
Quake 4 ? dual core only
Shadow Ops: Red Mercury ? 64bit
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl ? 64bit dual core
Unreal Tournament 2004 ? 64bit
WWII Tank Commander ? 64bit

and i note that some of them require 64-bit to make a bigger difference; my testing with single/multi-GPU was done on Vista32; i have since migrated to Vista64 to take advantage of more system RAM.

edit:

damn A NEWER LIST:

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33902850

Edit 1: Unless otherwise stated, quad core support means that all cores bellow it will fully work.

==================Quad Core=====================================
Alan Wake - Ground up quad core support.
Bioshock (Unreal Engine 3) - Quad core support.
Call Of Duty 4 - Ground up quad core support.
Company of Heroes - Ground up quad core support
Crysis - MP Beta Dual Core support, full game ground up Quad Core support.
DiRT - Ground up quad core support (up to 8 cores reported).
Flight Simulator X - Quad core support with patch.
Lost Planet - Ground up quad core support. (octa core support as well).
MOH: Airborn (Unreal Engine 3) - Ground up quad core support.
Supreme Commander - Ground up quad core support.
The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion - Quad core ground up, can use 5 threads.
World in Conflict - Ground up quad core support.
Unreal Tournament 3 (Unreal Engine 3) - Ground up quad core support.

Stop with the jokes. You are not even funny.

You do understand what year this is right? It's 2009. Out of all those games name the ones that was released this year.

Alan Wake is not even released yet. Oblivion is not a quad optimized from ground up even if it was benches show other wise. http://techreport.com/articles.x/11160/4 It barely takes advantage of dual core.

COD4 quad optimized? You must be joking... http://www.guru3d.com/article/...quad-core-processors/3 Absolutely makes no difference... If anything it's the cache difference giving extra 1 or 2 fps.

Most of the games you mentioned was released last year or even prior.

And the facts still remain. Most of the games you mentioned exception of 1 or 2 have limited quad support. Mostly cache differences of the quad to determine speed differences.

 

[apoppin]

i really don't know about Crysis MP - or Warhead

Crysis SP makes no difference that i have found in 2 vs 4 cores
- i am C&P'ing other's lists .. i cannot speak for their accuracy; just for mine

Stop with the jokes. You are not even funny. You do understand what year this is right?

Sure, you stop with the sarcasm, OK?

i DO understand the year, OK?
:roll:

You are *missing* the fact that Quad support was PATCHED into some of these games

and it will continue to happen

each day the argument against your Dually grows stronger
- and if it is just "cache" ... it helps the frame rates; upgrade for that reason

whatever the reason, Quad core provides a superior gaming experience at 19x12 over a similarly or even higher clocked dual core

Whether it is "worth" it - to YOU; is outside MY experience - it is worth it to me

 

[AzN]

Please apoppin you make sarcasm too. Except your jokes are attacking people by implying the person you are debating are aliens and have low IQ etc...

I specifically asked you name games that are quad optimized this year. I didn't say name all quad optimized games for the PC...

And some of those games you mentioned aren't even quad optimized. Even if got patched like Crysis for instance is useless as this game is GPU limited.

Superior experience? You mean marginal better experience in handful of games.

Of course it's worth it to you. You buy new hardware so you can get 10% better frame rates but most of us don't do that.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Azn

I specifically asked you name games that are quad optimized this year. I didn't say name all quad optimized games for the PC...

And some of those games you mentioned aren't even quad optimized. Even if got patched like Crysis for instance is useless as this game is GPU limited.

Superior experience? You mean marginal better experience in handful of games.

Of course it's worth it to you. You buy new hardware so you can get 10% better frame rates but most of us don't do that.

i *specifically* said i was going to include games that were patched to include support for more than 2 cores

No - don't put words in my mouth - DON'T mean "marginal" or i would have said so
- i *had* an e8600 at 4.33Ghz and i found a 4.0 GHz q9550s Quad core gaming in MY PC was to be NOTICEABLY *superior* [in every way also]t o that with my dual. So i sold my e8600 and kept the quad for everyday and benching.

ONE case in point is World-in-Conflict - i got 21 FPS min at 19x12 with 4.25 GHz e8600
verses a much higher min with the lower clocked Quad - 29 FPS
- for ME that is the difference between playable on the quad and not playable on the dual - or turning down details on my old e8600

8 frames in 30 is far more than 10% - don't minimize what i am saying

 

[AzN]

Then again I specifically asked you name the games released this year. It was your bright idea and name all quad games for the PC game library and even list games that aren't even quad optimized or even released to make your list a little bigger than it really is.

Marginal would be the correct term instead of superior. 1 game out of thousands of games does not make it superior.

Originally posted by: apoppin
ONE case in point is World-in-Conflict - i got 21 FPS min at 19x12 with 4.25 GHz e8600
verses a much higher min with the lower clocked Quad - 29 FPS
- for ME that is the difference between playable on the quad and not playable on the dual - or turning down details on my old e8600

8 frames in 30 is far more than 10% - don't minimize what i am saying

exactly ONE case in point but rest of the PC game library DON'T. For YOU maybe that the difference from unplayablity but the rest of us could care less if it hits 20fps in a RTS. Now if it was FPS shooter I would have to agree with your assessment but it's not.

ROFL... Like 8fps is far more better than 10% better frame rates in 1 game. Now if it was like that in all games it would actually be worth it for the rest of us.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Azn
Then again I specifically asked you name the games released this year. It was your bright idea and name all quad games for the PC game library and even list games that aren't even quad optimized or even released to make your list a little bigger than it really is.

Marginal would be the correct term instead of superior. 1 game out of thousands of games does not make it superior.

Originally posted by: apoppin
ONE case in point is World-in-Conflict - i got 21 FPS min at 19x12 with 4.25 GHz e8600
verses a much higher min with the lower clocked Quad - 29 FPS
- for ME that is the difference between playable on the quad and not playable on the dual - or turning down details on my old e8600

8 frames in 30 is far more than 10% - don't minimize what i am saying

exactly ONE case in point but rest of the PC game library DON'T. For YOU maybe that the difference from unplayablity but the rest of us could care less if it hits 20fps in a RTS. Now if it was FPS shooter I would have to agree with your assessment but it's not.

ROFL... Like 8fps is far more better than 10% better frame rates in 1 game. Now if it was like that in all games it would actually be worth it for the rest of us.

how about that list of games that i provided?
- the one that keeps getting longer and longer with every game patched to include multi-core support ?
- the list of unreleased games built on the engines i listed and the new games yet to be released?

You do not speak for "the rest of us"

 

[AzN]

I know I don't speak for the rest of us but the mass of us don't run 3x 4870 and a quad to pump 29fps in a RTS. You are the exception and I'm sure there few others who run 3x 4870 and a 4ghz quad.

What other games do you play besides WIC? Do you play bf2? That's all I ever play when I'm online and little bit of COD5. I used to be into RTS when Age of empires 2 hit but some of these games take way too long to finish or too quick when good RTS Player rush you. I already finished WIC single campaign not really into online RTS.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Azn
I know I don't speak for the rest of us but the mass of us don't run 3x 4870 and a quad to pump 29fps in a RTS. You are the exception and I'm sure there few others who run 3x 4870 and a 4ghz quad.

What other games do you play besides WIC? Do you play bf2? That's all I ever play when I'm online and little bit of COD5. I used to be into RTS when Age of empires 2 hit but some of these games take way too long to finish or too quick when good RTS Player rush you. I already finished WIC single campaign not really into online RTS.

agreed. i am pointing to a *trend* among publishers to have multi-threading in their games; one year ago you and i agreed completely

*IF* you have fast Graphics and are "no compromise" - *then* you really [really] really should seriously consider Quad core over dual. If you already have a dual, overclock it as much as possible to take advantage of what you have. My advice. Upgrade when YOU want to.

i am a FPS nut. i love RPG. RTS is on my list. But i bench all kinds of popular games because i love to see how HW performs.
. . . Unfortunately [or fortunately as it appears; and i will retire this year to pursue my hobby], the past nine months have been kinda busy for me and i am playing PC games much less than previously. The last game i completed was Riddick: Dark Athena - and i had to tie it in with a review i did of it to ease my conscience
- i also played Hellgate: London online till it went bust in the West; and i am known to also play AoC
... i am still fairly low level and enjoying it .. i have no reviews to write this week; i am benching CrossfireX

4970+4890 .. 4870(800/1060)+4890 .. 4870+4890(750/900)
.. and 4870-X2 + 4890 vs. 4870-X2 + 4870
.. and of course 4890 + 4890

VERRY INTERESTING results

btw, Thanks for reminding me of the important things; i still have a 30 day card to redeem for AoC - from last year!;
i can fit it in in-between benching tonight!! =)

. . . and BattleForge is now a free to play game [with limited cards]

 

[SickBeast]

They say that GTA4 absolutely needs a quad core for decent performance. Supreme Commander benefits greatly from one. IMO any serious gamer would want a quad core in their computer at this point if they are buying a new system. Newer games will use them more and more. There is only so much you can do with a single 3ghz 'core'.

I don't want to get too involved in this 'spat', but I will say that apoppin is providing facts and data whereas AZN seems to be all over the place, personally attacking him, and instead of contributing to the thread he is attacking apoppin's character and credibility.

I will say that apoppin is an asset to the forum here (and elsewhere).

 

[AzN]

You are retiring from work? How old are you?

 

[apoppin]

57

30 years running my same company successfully; it is about time to call it quits - i loved my work but it is physical and i have had several auto accidents


i just want to play games all day now

- and share my experiences with them

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
They say that GTA4 absolutely needs a quad core for decent performance. Supreme Commander benefits greatly from one. IMO any serious gamer would want a quad core in their computer at this point if they are buying a new system. Newer games will use them more and more. There is only so much you can do with a single 3ghz 'core'.

I don't want to get too involved in this 'spat', but I will say that apoppin is providing facts and data whereas AZN seems to be all over the place, personally attacking him, and instead of contributing to the thread he is attacking apoppin's character and credibility.

I will say that apoppin is an asset to the forum here (and elsewhere).

And I agree with GTA4 but you can still get away with a fast dual core which I did. Supreme Commander is another and that's really about it. Newer games might use it or might not. Developers are still releasing only dual core optimized games even today and even if it's quad optimized the performance difference is very small. Quad optimization hasn't really penetrated and those 2 are really the only exception since the release of Q6600 December of 2006. To say you need a quad to run a multi-gpu setup is what I have a hard time agreeing with. Sure there are those exceptions but not enough to warrant a quad if you already have a fast dual core.

You already got yourself involved. Providing facts and data in 1 game out of thousands? Data is already available on the web if you search PC hardware and gaming sites. Personally attacking? There were plenty of personal attacks from Mark too. You seem biased more than anything sickbeast. If you don't want to get involved I suggest you stay out of it next time.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: apoppin
57

30 years running my same company successfully; it is about time to call it quits - i loved my work but it is physical and i have had several auto accidents


i just want to play games all day now

- and share my experiences with them

Damn you a old man. Nearly my father's age. ROFL I didn't think older guys played video games because you really didn't grow up with it. I was playing video games since I could barely talk.

I could write some articles for you if you wish but I have bad grammar.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: apoppin
57

30 years running my same company successfully; it is about time to call it quits - i loved my work but it is physical and i have had several auto accidents


i just want to play games all day now

- and share my experiences with them

Damn you a old man.

I could write some articles for you if you wish but I have bad grammar.

nonsense - i have just been young for a very long time
- my big wave surfing career started when i moved to Hawaii just before i turned 40
-- and i was an alternative Rock Radio Station DJ in Honolulu in the mid-90s .. it is TRUE, you are as young as you act and feel

. . . and i am an editor - no worries
- my first real job was in Dublin - at age 18 i was chess editor for the Evening Press and This Week Magazine
- i am just back to writing and editing again - full circle; this time it is a hobby that also pays

 

[lulz69]

bump

wheres the single card review? lulz

Im about to get a new rig with 4890 single card. Wondering if I should buy a i7, or just a Phenom 720 black edition.