Which would be better for Oblivion?

[dennilfloss]

E8400 or similarly priced Quad-core?

 

[Spydermag68]

Nef much?

 

[n7]

Justed loaded up Oblivion & ran around a little.

It used at best 1.5 cores, though never actually even pegged one core fully...i think Vista tends to spread the load around between cores alot i've noticed.


So an OCed E8400 would be faster, but that's Oblivion.

UE3 games do utilize multi-cores though:
http://picsorban.com/upload/ut...tithreaded%20menus.jpg
http://picsorban.com/upload/war-floodgates.jpg
http://picsorban.com/upload/wa...%20node%20perching.jpg

 

[lopri]

Oblivion was perfectly smooth with Opteron 165 with a 8800 (insert your favorite moniker). UE3 engine, however, does use at least 2 cores like n7 says.

 

[taltamir]

E8400... the only thing quad core is faster at is graphic encoding...
But the E8400 now has SSE4 which doubles the performance on most graphical stuff (divx, xvid, h264 encoding already support sSE4 for double performance...), the only SSE4 quad is the 1200$ one... the Q6600 (20$ more then the E8400) would encode SLOWER due to lack of SSE4... and it will be slower in games, and it will be slower in MOST things. except generic multi threaded applications that are very well scaled but do NOT have SSE4 support.

However, if you are a heavy encoder, wait a month for the Q8600... it will have SSE4 and will annihilate.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: Spydermag68
Nef much?

???

Nope. Not much of an encoder. I don't mind if that takes longer. It's just that my 3870@850/1215 is probably starved by my current X2 4200+, so I am looking at a CPU upgrade in the spring. Might not need to if Oblivion used 100% of each core but it does not.

 

[lopri]

I never knew there was such thing as "Past Lifer".

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: taltamir
E8400... the only thing quad core is faster at is graphic encoding...
But the E8400 now has SSE4 which doubles the performance on most graphical stuff (divx, xvid, h264 encoding already support sSE4 for double performance...), the only SSE4 quad is the 1200$ one... the Q6600 (20$ more then the E8400) would encode SLOWER due to lack of SSE4... and it will be slower in games, and it will be slower in MOST things. except generic multi threaded applications that are very well scaled but do NOT have SSE4 support.

However, if you are a heavy encoder, wait a month for the Q8600... it will have SSE4 and will annihilate.

At it again ??? Not all SSE4 software (in fact most) do NOT use SSE4....So how can you justify this comment ?

 

[Rubycon]

An Athlon with no heatsink plays oblivion the fastest.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: lopri
I never knew there was such thing as "Past Lifer".

Now you do.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: taltamir
E8400... the only thing quad core is faster at is graphic encoding...
But the E8400 now has SSE4 which doubles the performance on most graphical stuff (divx, xvid, h264 encoding already support sSE4 for double performance...), the only SSE4 quad is the 1200$ one... the Q6600 (20$ more then the E8400) would encode SLOWER due to lack of SSE4... and it will be slower in games, and it will be slower in MOST things. except generic multi threaded applications that are very well scaled but do NOT have SSE4 support.

However, if you are a heavy encoder, wait a month for the Q8600... it will have SSE4 and will annihilate.

At it again ??? Not all SSE4 software (in fact most) do NOT use SSE4....So how can you justify this comment ?

I specifically named three programs that do, the most commonly used encoding tools. For which it IS faster.

And this thread is SPECIFICALLY asking which CPU to get, E8400 or similarly priced Quad, (Q6600).