Question The reason 6 core CPU's are the new minimum performance standard is...

[moonbogg]

because my kid was just getting 50fps in Gears of War 5...with Star Wars Battlefront II running in the background. At first, I looked at the FPS and saw 50 and told him to restart the game because his performance was sucking. He closes it and instantly he's flying a spaceship and getting shot at by imperial forces. I went from thinking "man, this performance sucks" to "whoa, not on a quad-core you wouldn't!"

 

[VirtualLarry]

Careful now. He's on his way to multi-boxing WoW... and then he might take up gold-farming. And put a down payment on a house... well, maybe I'm getting ahead of things.

Anyways, good job! Six-core for the win!

 

[Assimilator1]

Lol, running 2 games at the same time and 50 FPS, nice .
Why was he running 2?

 

[TheELF]

whoa, not on a quad-core you wouldn't!"

Depends on how the games work, if they completely stop or at least go to low priority while not in focus you can do that on a quad or even a dual core, if the second game doesn't do anything it doesn't use up any CPU.
System ram on the other hand....although it would go to page file but that would mean waiting a bit to switch between them.

 

[Massive79]

because my kid was just getting 50fps in Gears of War 5...with Star Wars Battlefront II running in the background. At first, I looked at the FPS and saw 50 and told him to restart the game because his performance was sucking. He closes it and instantly he's flying a spaceship and getting shot at by imperial forces. I went from thinking "man, this performance sucks" to "whoa, not on a quad-core you wouldn't!"

Lol...2 games at the same time, never think of it