How long will a E6400@ 3.2GHZ "future proof" me for gaming?

[AlgaeEater]

Not to derail the thread too much, but for the discussions about Supreme Commander and Cpu power, I have to agree. SC really runs a lot faster on a dual or quad core machine.

However; Command & Conquer 3 runs smoothly and looks better (Imo) than SC on my single core machine. Obviously a dual core machine would also run C&C3 fast, if not faster.

Even though I enjoy the fact that SC is the wave of the future, showing how a program uses more cores on the cpu to do more processing power (for the AI in that game), I also feel that it isn't a end all be all example for the benefits of dual core gaming. I feel that game's code isn't as optimized as it should be.

 

[hcforde]

This is the equation that most replyers are leaving out of their answers, CONSOLES. The console business model is different than the PC gaming model which is totally independent. In console gaming the console maker gets a cut from each game made/sold for that console . Some consoles are sold at a loss but the manufacturer makes it up on game sales. (The Wii is not sold at a loss and still makes money on the console sale and the games sold)

So is it about gameplay or graphics? Is it about simply having the technology to do it and expecting every body to buy the technology because it is there?

The boxed computers are the major sales for a company. Gamers are a minor segment though we like to think that the computer industry world revolves around us. Go to a computer retailer and ask them how many HIGH END components they stock VS MID RANGE components.

The midrange is where people are buying and the gaming industry can not make something too far out of the market or they will NOT recoup their investment in the game regardless of the available technology. They are in business to make money not push the technology envelope. That is the trade off they must make in deciding the level of game they will create in competition with consoles. Timing is everything, you want to meet the market where the market is. Most games are designed for the midrange.

All that said (and it is not exhausted) think about where the midrange will be in the year 2010.

Also consider the there are some games that are GPU bound and some that are CPU bound. I believe that the trend will be away from CPU bound games. One video card company follows another in putting out new technology also just like the CPU companies.

An ATI insider PM me a few months ago concerning graphics card upgrades. What he told me blew me away and made sense of the ATI/AMD merger. ATI is working on a CPU for the GPU "ON THE CARD" and both will be upgradable. Think about it buy one base GPU card this card has 2 sockets or possibly 4 sockets. Since everything is integrated it will work faster together. Upgrades can be accomplished by plugging in GPU or CPU chips. Cost of a chip is lower than buying a new card for the consumer and more profit for the company. Need physics, plug in a CPU on the Graphics board. Need more FPS plug in another GPU chip. The focus of what you purchase then changes. The motherboard and CPU do NOT become the major factor. Even midrange computers can plug in a card like this an go if they wanted. No more need to go the overclocking route. (which most box computer motherboards/bios can not do).

Under this senario, the midrange gets more attractive even to game developers because the cost of recouping their investment in higher performing games becomes easier.

ATI and Nvidia also create the graphics chips for the consoles. They know the roadmap for the future in that market segment. They also want to keep both segments alive, it is called diversification - not putting all of ones eggs in one basket. But when a video card cost as much as a PS3 and is less capable and with a new king of the hill coming out every 6-9 months, that issue needs to be addressed.

 

[idiotekniQues]

that has been a rumor for a long time now - about the ability to upgrade just the chip on the GC in the future. ive read about it on reputable hardware sites over a year ago who heard it from the GC makers themselves.

your inside information is a bit outdated 😀

 

[cubeless]

and then u will need more (or ddr 6) memory, or they'll change the socket, or... pc stuff will always be a moving target...

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: Ichigo
Just a comment about some weird things a couple of you said. Consoles can use the same display and sound systems as PC's these days, so there's no need to factor in the cost of an HDTV or anything.

Also, the "main" genres are fps/rts/sports? Where do you get that? How does that include games like Prince of Persia, GTA series, God of War, Gears of War even (third person shooter, =p), Armored Core 4 (just came out), Tekken series etc? Heck, you even missed RPG's, which believe me is way more "main" than any PC dominated genre will ever become.

i agree that my categorization of the three main genres was not a good one.

but let's say shooters instead of fps so we can avoid that silly gears of war thing 🙂

id say shooters are one of the main genres. rts maybe not. sports yes. i guess a third one would be maybe arcade style games? or whatever would include games like mortal kombat & mario & zelda & prince of persia.

i suppose rpg would be one of the main genres as well. i think the pc interface is better for them as well - though not as decisively as for shooters/rts

 

[rmed64]

It really all depends on what kind of games you are going to play. If you are still going to be mainly playing valve source games 2 years from now, you wont have any problem. It takes time to make games with new features. 64 bit has been around for a long time now since windows xp 64, but how many games actually make any use of it? Multi threaded games are coming along, cod 2, quake 4, supcom etc have all started making some use of smp.

I'm babbling

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: rmed64
It really all depends on what kind of games you are going to play. If you are still going to be mainly playing valve source games 2 years from now, you wont have any problem. It takes time to make games with new features. 64 bit has been around for a long time now since windows xp 64, but how many games actually make any use of it? Multi threaded games are coming along, cod 2, quake 4, supcom etc have all started making some use of smp.

I'm babbling

not really

if you are gonna play the *latest* games ... at relatively high-resolutions [16x12 & UP^], DC plus 8800GTX is "straining" right now -- with max details ... there isn't a LOT left for next gen games

64bit has been AMD's "thing" ... and frankly i *know* some of you are gonna hate this but

it doesn't matter about AMD ... *intel* is behind Quad-Core and to a lesser extent, 64-bit

expect Devs to "jump" when intel says it is so ... and they have been programming for QC for over two years now 😉

*look* what happened with PCIe ... the entire industry shifted from AGP in less than 2 years ... for no tangible advantage except SLI/Xfire GPU and MB sales and a greater bandwidth 'future'.

... and fact of the matter is, we ALREADY see games coded for Quad ... Supreme Commander, very well ... STALKER and other games ... that is an *unstoppable trend*

if you still play *old games* you can use your CRT for 10x7 😛
... and single core is fine for creeky old Source Engine games ... wwwwWhere's tthe ffFlashlight?
:roll:

 

[apoppin]

ok ... last shot before bed

http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200701/N07.0126.1423.58507.htm?Page=2

Mark Rein interview

Rein: We always aim Unreal for systems that people don?t have yet. (laughs) Whether its UT or any Unreal game, so I think the sweet spot has yet to show up. Again, it?s 64-bit and a ton of RAM, like an NVIDIA dual 8800s and Core 2 Extreme Quad processor?you could certainly build a super rig, but UT3 with everything turned up all the way is still going to struggle on that kind of thing. A year from now, it?ll still be a game that is a showcase game for whatever hardware you happen to be getting then.

*that's* what's coming

shortly 😉

😛

 

[rmed64]

Thats more a lack of good programming.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues

Originally posted by: cubeless
re why pc games... if u r into strategy games, then i believe that the pc is the only choice... if u r into shootem ups, then console is fine...

i respectfully disagree.

fps are superior on a pc.

not only because the mouse is infinitely more superior to a small joystick for aiming, but the keyboard comes into play as well.

when games start coming out that will be for both windows live users and xbox users, a good pc fps player will be able crush all but the most leet xbox fps players.

just until a good kb/mouse adapter comes out for the 360.....

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: apoppin
next year the PC is gonna *blow away* the consoles 😛

DX10 brings definite advantages for the PC ... and more HW muscle is gonna be needed to *show* the differences

along with the new and "full dx10" games will come multi-threading for all games ... an *entire new generation* of demanding video games
--prepare according ... or just upgrade when your rig feels 'slow' to you 😉

i am *waiting* to upgrade ... when i am *forced* to get rid of SC and you guys dump DC in favour of Quad

i think your first line should read something more like
"next year the $2500 PC is gonna *blow away* the consoles 😛"

😉

at my rigs current level, which is not new by any means, i would say graphically equal, or a bit better than the 360 running 720p and my pc running 1280x1024. i am really interested in seeing how the new 360 elite that will do 1080p will handle those games as currently you get hiccups at 720p every so often.

i just got rb6 vegas for pc and have it for 360 so i can now do a nice back to back test and see which one rules 🙂

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: apoppin
next year the PC is gonna *blow away* the consoles 😛

DX10 brings definite advantages for the PC ... and more HW muscle is gonna be needed to *show* the differences

along with the new and "full dx10" games will come multi-threading for all games ... an *entire new generation* of demanding video games
--prepare according ... or just upgrade when your rig feels 'slow' to you 😉

i am *waiting* to upgrade ... when i am *forced* to get rid of SC and you guys dump DC in favour of Quad

i think your first line should read something more like
"next year the $2500 PC is gonna *blow away* the consoles 😛"

😉

at my rigs current level, which is not new by any means, i would say graphically equal, or a bit better than the 360 running 720p and my pc running 1280x1024. i am really interested in seeing how the new 360 elite that will do 1080p will handle those games as currently you get hiccups at 720p every so often.

i just got rb6 vegas for pc and have it for 360 so i can now do a nice back to back test and see which one rules 🙂

rb6 vegas is a crappy port to PC
:thumbsdown:

and why "$2500"?
😕

try comparing GoW on a really nice display to your PC 😛
GoW is better ... right now .. to the best PCs

that 'changes' sometime next year, with full DX10 games ...

heck even with basically DX9c Crysis ... the sli'd 8800GTX/QuadCore/4GB RAM systems - the $2500 systems of today - will *struggle* with Crysis
--that's according to the Dev Mark Rein ... and the game IS *optimized* for PC 😛

evidently we will see Crysis ported to Xbox360 [they said it certainly can be done] ... and the PC version will be superior

heck ... even old Source is planning QC
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2050563,00.asp

Alan Wake ... Vista only .. recommends QC

DC is not "future proof" for gaming

 

[ArchAngel777]

Unfortunately, with the advent of multi-core technology, upgrading is a very difficult decision. If they plan to keep adding more cores every 6 - 12 months, it is going to get very difficult to predict anything. Certainly right now QC doesn't have much software support, at least in gaming. The game that does support it seems to be pretty crappy overall anyway (my opinion). So, that leaves us with? Not much. But still, if QC does catch on and they skip DC, then DC will have been a waste. There is a lot of uncertainty regarding these new cores that it makes it extremely difficult to wait, or buy now. I wish it were simple and clock speed only mattered... The good old days!

Though the realist in me believes this:

A) The majority of the gaming comunity will be dual core for the next 2 years minimum
+
B) Game developers tend to develop for either the LCM, or the mainstream category.
=
C) Therefore, dual core will have a long life cycle.

So, I mean, I think DC will be more than enough power. You might just miss out on some the "goodies" that the devs *might* add to a game.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777
Unfortunately, with the advent of multi-core technology, upgrading is a very difficult decision. If they plan to keep adding more cores every 6 - 12 months, it is going to get very difficult to predict anything. Certainly right now QC doesn't have much software support, at least in gaming. The game that does support it seems to be pretty crappy overall anyway (my opinion). So, that leaves us with? Not much. But still, if QC does catch on and they skip DC, then DC will have been a waste. There is a lot of uncertainty regarding these new cores that it makes it extremely difficult to wait, or buy now. I wish it were simple and clock speed only mattered... The good old days!

Though the realist in me believes this:

A) The majority of the gaming comunity will be dual core for the next 2 years minimum
+
B) Game developers tend to develop for either the LCM, or the mainstream category.
=
C) Therefore, dual core will have a long life cycle.

So, I mean, I think DC will be more than enough power. You might j
ust miss out on some the "goodies" that the devs *might* add to a game.

ah, but they won't be *adding more cores* every few months

DX10 is "finalized" ... HW plans are somewhat 'finalized' for QC

it'll be at least two or three years before we ned more than 4 cores

A) the majority will miss out on *maximum* ... as usual

B) Sure, you can still game on a SC CPU an a 6600GT ... 😛

C) "long life"? ... nothing like SC

:roll:

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: apoppin
next year the PC is gonna *blow away* the consoles 😛

DX10 brings definite advantages for the PC ... and more HW muscle is gonna be needed to *show* the differences

along with the new and "full dx10" games will come multi-threading for all games ... an *entire new generation* of demanding video games
--prepare according ... or just upgrade when your rig feels 'slow' to you 😉

i am *waiting* to upgrade ... when i am *forced* to get rid of SC and you guys dump DC in favour of Quad

i think your first line should read something more like
"next year the $2500 PC is gonna *blow away* the consoles 😛"

😉

at my rigs current level, which is not new by any means, i would say graphically equal, or a bit better than the 360 running 720p and my pc running 1280x1024. i am really interested in seeing how the new 360 elite that will do 1080p will handle those games as currently you get hiccups at 720p every so often.

i just got rb6 vegas for pc and have it for 360 so i can now do a nice back to back test and see which one rules 🙂

rb6 vegas is a crappy port to PC
:thumbsdown:

and why "$2500"?
😕

try comparing GoW on a really nice display to your PC 😛
GoW is better ... right now .. to the best PCs

that 'changes' sometime next year, with full DX10 games ...

heck even with basically DX9c Crysis ... the sli'd 8800GTX/QuadCore/4GB RAM systems - the $2500 systems of today - will *struggle* with Crysis
--that's according to the Dev Mark Rein ... and the game IS *optimized* for PC 😛

evidently we will see Crysis ported to Xbox360 [they said it certainly can be done] ... and the PC version will be superior

heck ... even old Source is planning QC
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2050563,00.asp

Alan Wake ... Vista only .. recommends QC

DC is not "future proof" for gaming

i said $2500 because that it is probably going to run you for a rig if built from scratch to play these games at high def levels - 1920x1200, 1920x1080 or higher. an 8800gtx or whatever they come out with next is going to be a must to get 40fps+ at those resolutions, matched with 3GB of ram, a cpu that complements it along with everything else. not talking about a evolved computer that people on this forum could probably do, but for somebody who needs to start from scratch, which imo is the reason devolpers put the pc version as the bottom line and not really worry about it.

i have gow but can't compare it to a pc version, as i thought it was 360 only. rb6 vegas is the only one i can compare since i won't play sports games on the pc since i only have wireless 360 controllers

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues

Originally posted by: cubeless
re why pc games... if u r into strategy games, then i believe that the pc is the only choice... if u r into shootem ups, then console is fine...

i respectfully disagree.

fps are superior on a pc.

not only because the mouse is infinitely more superior to a small joystick for aiming, but the keyboard comes into play as well.

when games start coming out that will be for both windows live users and xbox users, a good pc fps player will be able crush all but the most leet xbox fps players.

just until a good kb/mouse adapter comes out for the 360.....

key word there is "until"

 

[idiotekniQues]

also, right now it makes NO SENSE to get a quad core cpu if money is any sort of object. it would be cheaper to get a dual core now (63-6600)and then a quad core later when they get sub 300 (rumored to be late 2007)

because right now only ONE game really takes advantage of QC and that is supreme commander - and the jump from DC to QC is not even remotely close to the difference of running SC to DC.

and game developers can talk all they want about quad core, and im sure that it will be a big part of the future. but like it has been noted, barely ANY games use two cores yet - and how long has DC been out so far.

let all the people freak you out with the hype, but it really is just that hype. they can throw around one game, SC, right now and that is all they can do. dollar for dollar DC is the way to go right now until QC is cheaper and software that really uses it is not just talk.

like i said, you can buy a dc now for sub 300 whereas a quad core is double that - and you dont need the qc yet unless you are an SC whore. sell your dc down the road when qc's drop. and bam, you made the smartest move.

 

[gramboh]

apopping I'm not sure why you are gushing over GoW so much.

I've seen it at 720p on a quality HD set. I think Oblivion at 1920x1200 4X AA/16X AF HDR on, max details is more visually impressive.

Test Drive Unlimited at the same settings on PC looks better than 360 as well.

Xbox 360/PS3 HD graphics are definitely impressive, but a current PC can edge them out and within a year the console will be lagging significantly. They are not powerful enough to push a 3D rendered game at 1080P either.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: gramboh
apopping I'm not sure why you are gushing over GoW so much.

I've seen it at 720p on a quality HD set. I think Oblivion at 1920x1200 4X AA/16X AF HDR on, max details is more visually impressive.

Test Drive Unlimited at the same settings on PC looks better than 360 as well.

Xbox 360/PS3 HD graphics are definitely impressive, but a current PC can edge them out and within a year the console will be lagging significantly. They are not powerful enough to push a 3D rendered game at 1080P either.

why Gow? because it's the best the consoles can currently do ...

and your opinion is noted ... for every PC elitist there are two console elitists
:roll:

i AM a PC gamer ... i already said the DX10 games would blow away the consoles ... on a fast rig
:Q
==============

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
also, right now it makes NO SENSE to get a quad core cpu if money is any sort of object. it would be cheaper to get a dual core now (63-6600)and then a quad core later when they get sub 300 (rumored to be late 2007)

because right now only ONE game really takes advantage of QC and that is supreme commander - and the jump from DC to QC is not even remotely close to the difference of running SC to DC.

and game developers can talk all they want about quad core, and im sure that it will be a big part of the future. but like it has been noted, barely ANY games use two cores yet - and how long has DC been out so far.

let all the people freak you out with the hype, but it really is just that hype. they can throw around one game, SC, right now and that is all they can do. dollar for dollar DC is the way to go right now until QC is cheaper and software that really uses it is not just talk.

like i said, you can buy a dc now for sub 300 whereas a quad core is double that - and you dont need the qc yet unless you are an SC whore. sell your dc down the road when qc's drop. and bam, you made the smartest move.

*who* is recommending anyone buy QC right now?
😕

we are talking about the "future-proofness" of the E6400 @ 3.2Ghz 😉

--it's just "not so good" --keeping Quad-threaded games [here] and DX10 [a year away] in mind 😛
:roll:

 

[bob4432]

uggghhh - rb6 vegas on my pc even @ 1024x768 (and my machine o/ced to 2.5GHz) on medium settings played bad. looks like the x1800xt is low end now. guess i will give the d@mn game to a buddy who has a 7900gtx 🙁

i do better w/ the 360 gamepad than i did w/ kb/mouse do to fps issues. 1280x1024 even at low is out of the question, and 1024x768 has tearing and all kinds of articfacts - very bad for pc.

looks like a x1950xt would be min for this game...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: bob4432
uggghhh - rb6 vegas on my pc even @ 1024x768 (and my machine o/ced to 2.5GHz) on medium settings played bad. looks like the x1800xt is low end now. guess i will give the d@mn game to a buddy who has a 7900gtx 🙁

i do better w/ the 360 gamepad than i did w/ kb/mouse do to fps issues. 1280x1024 even at low is out of the question, and 1024x768 has tearing and all kinds of articfacts - very bad for pc.

looks like a x1950xt would be min for this game...

the *problem* is with that badly optimized and fUgly port rb6 vegas

give it to someone with a 8800GTX ... the 7900gtx ain't that much faster 😛

 

[Regs]

When Far Cry came out there wasn't anything out on the market that could play it at 1600x1200 or above with max settings.

Oblivion as of late is still demanding even on a 8800GTX and a Core 2 and that will likely remain well after Penyrn and Barcelona.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: bob4432
uggghhh - rb6 vegas on my pc even @ 1024x768 (and my machine o/ced to 2.5GHz) on medium settings played bad. looks like the x1800xt is low end now. guess i will give the d@mn game to a buddy who has a 7900gtx 🙁

i do better w/ the 360 gamepad than i did w/ kb/mouse do to fps issues. 1280x1024 even at low is out of the question, and 1024x768 has tearing and all kinds of articfacts - very bad for pc.

looks like a x1950xt would be min for this game...

the *problem* is with that badly optimized and fUgly port rb6 vegas

give it to someone with a 8800GTX ... the 7900gtx ain't that much faster 😛

honestly they shouldn't have released it for pc in this state...it is ugly on pc, like you said - colors are so wash out even with the higher color setting.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777
Unfortunately, with the advent of multi-core technology, upgrading is a very difficult decision. If they plan to keep adding more cores every 6 - 12 months, it is going to get very difficult to predict anything. Certainly right now QC doesn't have much software support, at least in gaming. The game that does support it seems to be pretty crappy overall anyway (my opinion). So, that leaves us with? Not much. But still, if QC does catch on and they skip DC, then DC will have been a waste. There is a lot of uncertainty regarding these new cores that it makes it extremely difficult to wait, or buy now. I wish it were simple and clock speed only mattered... The good old days!

Though the realist in me believes this:

A) The majority of the gaming comunity will be dual core for the next 2 years minimum
+
B) Game developers tend to develop for either the LCM, or the mainstream category.
=
C) Therefore, dual core will have a long life cycle.

So, I mean, I think DC will be more than enough power. You might j
ust miss out on some the "goodies" that the devs *might* add to a game.

ah, but they won't be *adding more cores* every few months

DX10 is "finalized" ... HW plans are somewhat 'finalized' for QC

it'll be at least two or three years before we ned more than 4 cores

A) the majority will miss out on *maximum* ... as usual

B) Sure, you can still game on a SC CPU an a 6600GT ... 😛

C) "long life"? ... nothing like SC

:roll:

Perhaps... Well, I bit the bullet today and ordered myself a X2 3800 for 939. Hoping to clock it at 2.6 Ghz... At least this dual core can tide me over until the quad cores become the norm. :thumbsup:

 

[Simply]

Quads for gaming won't be the norm for at least 6 to 8 yrs, You still have more then half of the PC gaming players using p4 and old duel cores, Also not Sc did people complain Look at some newer mmos that people complain how much CPU video card resources they use. And it killing those games as well, Most game makers will shy away from making duel core 2 games till at least 2008 to 2009 and even then there won't be tones cause many game makers don't want alienate more then half there fan base just so a few people can play a super game like SC

Quads will mainly benefit people who do a lot video editing 3d modeling photoshoping programing ect. So most people will be safe with most of duel core out now for a good 3 yrs. P4 ect just starting to become out of stock now, And they been around for at least 4 yrs.