Intel E8400 and number of threads

[Nightsilencer]

I have an intel E8400, and as it has 2 cores, it can run 2 simultaneous threads (Core architecture does not have hyperthreading as you know).

I'm not very worried about this CPU performing well in future games, because I honestely believe this CPU can stand its own for at least another couple of years.

Still, I have a question: When games come that use 2+ threads (there are probably a few out there), how well will this CPU handle them? Let's suppose you run a game that spawns 4 threads: Of course a Quad will perform better because it can dedicate each of its cores to each thread, but would a dual perfom badly? Would it be overwhelmed, or despite the fact the it has 2 cores, could it handle 4 threads reasonably? (of course I don't expect it to be on Quad level).

despite of having 2 cores, could this CPU's speed sort of make up for handling 4 threads and still mantain an acceptable level of perfomance?

I once posted a question in this forum asking for opinions on this particular CPU, and its ability to handle games until 2011, and the general consensus was that it would, but at the time I didn't ask specifically about the number of threads a game spawns.

 

[f4phantom2500]

i'm fairly certain that games that are specifically multithreaded will not create a set number of threads, but will instead distribute tasks based on your hardware. if your hardware can only handle 2, then it'll create 2. you probably shouldn't worry about it. by the time something comes out that your processor can't run very fast you'll be able to upgrade to something capable for cheap. also anything that would run on lga 775 would probably suck by the time your e8400 sucks. even the lga 775 quad cores would be sluggish by that time. there's just no point in worrying about it.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

UT3 uses all 4 threads, even COD:WAW is mutli threaded, not sure how many though

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: Nightsilencer
I have an intel E8400, and as it has 2 cores, it can run 2 simultaneous threads (Core architecture does not have hyperthreading as you know).

I'm not very worried about this CPU performing well in future games, because I honestely believe this CPU can stand its own for at least another couple of years.

Still, I have a question: When games come that use 2+ threads (there are probably a few out there), how well will this CPU handle them? Let's suppose you run a game that spawns 4 threads: Of course a Quad will perform better because it can dedicate each of its cores to each thread, but would a dual perfom badly? Would it be overwhelmed, or despite the fact the it has 2 cores, could it handle 4 threads reasonably? (of course I don't expect it to be on Quad level).

despite of having 2 cores, could this CPU's speed sort of make up for handling 4 threads and still mantain an acceptable level of perfomance?

I once posted a question in this forum asking for opinions on this particular CPU, and its ability to handle games until 2011, and the general consensus was that it would, but at the time I didn't ask specifically about the number of threads a game spawns.

There are already some games taking advantage of 3 or more threads...

Wic, UT3, UE3 games, GTAIV, FC2, Supcom etc...

However, their ability to use 4 cores vs. 2 does not yield double the performance or double framerates. But, in some cases it does enable a 65nm 2.4ghz quadcore cpu to equal a 45nm 3.0ghz dualcore cpu. Really this topic has been beaten to death, and I don't think anyone has the answer.

Just know that multi-core is where it's headed.

 

[Jeff7181]

I wouldn't worry about it this year... probably won't even be an issue next year.

 

[JimO]

Don't worry about the number of threads. Windows shows I have currently running 860 threads on my dual core; it works fine. A processor can switch quickly between threads so having too many threads is not a problem.

The problem is the amount of work that needs to be done. The calculations a game has to be done can be divided over one, two, four, or any number of threads. If a game can divide it's workload over less threads than you have cores, you will have cores that cannot help out with these calculations. But if there are more threads than cores, each core will simply do multiple threads.

Not having enough cores is never a problem. A very fast single core processor could run anything you wanted, if it existed. A fast quad core processor is more powerful than a fast dual core. So in future games that can make use of quad cores, they will have an advantage. But this advantage is purely from the fact that four cores can do more calculations than two, not because the number of threads equals the number of cores.

 

[Denithor]

Check out these gaming benchmarks.

Looking at the first three you will see the faster dual core winning easily over the slower-clocked quads. In the last game (UT3) the quads come out mostly ahead, except for the Q8200 which is neutered by its 4MB cache spread over four cores.

In a game like UT3 the dualcore chip still manages to provide an enjoyably high fps. However, that won't be the case going forward as games get more and more multithreaded. Take GTA 4 for example: a stock-clocked Q6600 basically matches an e8500 @ 3.6GHz. The slower dualcores (e6600 and X2 series) just don't have the horsepower to get the job done at all. Chip cache is also becoming more important, you see a 10% difference between the same-clocked e6850 & e8400 (4MB vs 6MB).

 

[Nightsilencer]

Like I said in the opening post, when multithreaded games became standard, I know my CPU will not reach Quad core perfomance, but I know it wont fall horribally behind.

And let's not forget that I'm basing myself on the assumption that multithreaded games become the standard by 2011-2012... which is the time I plan to keep this CPU. But something tells me, the big shift of things will happen when the new generation of consoles hit the market, which will be around the 2012 mark.
Until then, I strongly believe everyone with a Duo or a Quad will be fine for playing games.

 

[Denithor]

Well, GTA 4 is the newest game out that really supports quads properly. If you look at that benchmark I linked earlier you will see that the average fps from a 4GHz e8500 is close to the minimum fps from a 3GHz QX6850 (which is the older 65nm architecture, a newer quad with more cache would be even higher).

One thing to keep in mind though is that this benchmark is run at a CPU-bound resolution (12x10 no AA). At higher resolutions the GPU will contribute more to fps and I have a feeling the duals (especially at higher speeds) will continue to provide enough horsepower for a while. Just remember that this trend toward multithreaded gaming will accelerate over the next year or so as developers' efforts from the last year come to market.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: Denithor
Check out these gaming benchmarks.

Chip cache is also becoming more important, you see a 10% difference between the same-clocked e6850 & e8400 (4MB vs 6MB).

I doubt the cache size is the only reason why the E8400 is faster than the E6850.