How long before dual core game support happens?

[Deleted member 4644]

Do any games support dual core now? Are such games coming soon? Will this mean that an X64 4200 will be MORE powerful in the future for games, or will it still be an "older" processor?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Quake 4, Oblivion right now do.

Ut2k7, Crysis (I believe) and other titles comming.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
Do any games support dual core now? Are such games coming soon? Will this mean that an X64 4200 will be MORE powerful in the future for games, or will it still be an "older" processor?

By dual core you mean multi-threaded which means that it will take advantage as many cores as is made available, not just dual core.

As cmdrdredd said Quake 4, and Oblivion feature multi-threading. So does CoD2 and the other titles for some reason elude me right now

-Kevin

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
As cmdrdredd said Quake 4, and Oblivion feature multi-threading. So does CoD2 and the other titles for some reason elude me right now

-Kevin

F.E.A.R. does also, to some extent. So far, Quake 4 and Oblivion are the only two that are able to completely take advantage of the second core.

 

[schneiderguy]

Text

Rainbow Six Las Vegas seems to have pretty large performance increases going from single to dual core on lower resolutions

going from a dual core to a quad core has a ~20% performance increase even on 1600*1200 :Q

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Text

Rainbow Six Las Vegas seems to have pretty large performance increases going from single to dual core on lower resolutions

going from a dual core to a quad core has a ~20% performance increase even on 1600*1200 :Q

I haven't even heard of that game. BTW, a 2 fps difference is an 8% difference. Of course, all games running on 2.0 Ghz A64's start getting GPU-bound.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Rainbow Six Vegas isn't the most impressive game out there and definately not the first choice when benchmarking. That's probably why you haven't heard of it.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Rainbow Six Vegas isn't the most impressive game out there and definately not the first choice when benchmarking. That's probably why you haven't heard of it.

No, that's not why. I have about 19 games installed on this system. I have 8 FPS's, 9 flight sims, 3 Need For Speed's, and even one train sim.:laugh: I'm guessing maybe it's because it isn't all that popular. I mean, that series has been out for many years, and unlike Quake, it's on about it's 15th version, isn't it? Oh, and I didn't mean that I had never heard of Rainbow Six, I just meant the Vegas rendition.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Rainbow Six Vegas isn't the most impressive game out there and definately not the first choice when benchmarking. That's probably why you haven't heard of it.

No, that's not why. I have about 19 games installed on this system. I have 8 FPS's, 9 flight sims, 3 Need For Speed's, and even one train sim.:laugh: I'm guessing maybe it's because it isn't all that popular. I mean, that series has been out for many years, and unlike Quake, it's on about it's 15th version, isn't it? Oh, and I didn't mean that I had never heard of Rainbow Six, I just meant the Vegas rendition.

It's a port of an Xbox360 game. On the 360 it's great, on the PC it's junk IMO.

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Text

Rainbow Six Las Vegas seems to have pretty large performance increases going from single to dual core on lower resolutions

going from a dual core to a quad core has a ~20% performance increase even on 1600*1200 :Q

I haven't even heard of that game. BTW, a 2 fps difference is an 8% difference. Of course, all games running on 2.0 Ghz A64's start getting GPU-bound.

59 fps on dual core to 73 FPS on a quad core @ 1600*1200 = 14 fps difference = 23% difference

it's the first PC game that has used the Unreal3 engine, which a LOT of games are going to use in the near future, so it should be a good indicator of how much performance gain you're going to get with your dual or quad core processors.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Text

Rainbow Six Las Vegas seems to have pretty large performance increases going from single to dual core on lower resolutions

going from a dual core to a quad core has a ~20% performance increase even on 1600*1200 :Q

I haven't even heard of that game. BTW, a 2 fps difference is an 8% difference. Of course, all games running on 2.0 Ghz A64's start getting GPU-bound.

59 fps on dual core to 73 FPS on a quad core @ 1600*1200 = 14 fps difference = 23% difference

it's the first PC game that has used the Unreal3 engine, which a LOT of games are going to use in the near future, so it should be a good indicator of how much performance gain you're going to get with your dual or quad core processors.

At what settings? any AA or AF going on? that's all GPU dependant.

See I can run a game with one core disabled (Processor affinity) and benchmark it. Then turn on the other core and benchmark it again (quake 4 for example) and it will have a nice boost without AA or AF. With it on though the difference is more minor.