PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds is now hexacore+ CPU optimised

[KN1GHT]

I knew intel wouldn't take long, they cant let AMD get any market share or there Monopoly is gone.

I remember the Athlon64 what great tech that was, but AMD rested on there laurels and when the intel Core cpu's appeared it was the end of any sort of competition for years until now... Please AMD dont let it happen again

If possible check out Adore TV's video "Intel monopoly" (or something similar) on YouTube.

You will understand why AMD was kicked out of competition after that.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I totally agree with the above said. People need to get that old saying "single core speed only for games" out of their heads ones and for all. The few that argued otherwise won, argument over and done.

I can remember that a few months ago (maybe almost a year now) that the verdict was still for gaming only 4cores is plenty enough for premuim builds for years to come. LOL where are we now?

Please note not saying budget gaming builds, I mean premium. (1440p & higher overall)

You may argue that 6 cores are still going to last long for premium "gaming only builds", but this update testifies that quad cores even for gaming in premium build are not the best option anymore.

As for higher core counts like 8 and up, they will last way longer and just give much more overall performance. Proud AMD R7-1700 owner here coming from a i5 so I can testify to that.

People boasting about single speed are doing gaming a disservice,as so many games which do run badly,run badly due to them hogging one single thread and no amount of throwing hardware at it ever really works,meaning most of the player base has to put up with utterly crap performance,since they don't overclock or have the bestest SKU.

Its time more devs,instead of penny pinching and transferring the costs to gamers,actually tried to implement effective multi-threading especially in light of what the consoles have.

I mean at least 4 threads effectively used would be a start.

[DanceswithUnix]

I mean at least 4 threads effectively used would be a start.

Sadly many programmers just can't do threads properly, and worse still many believe that they can.

You either get stuff that doesn't matter put into other threads which just injects communication delays for no benefit, or worse you get a sea of thousands of threads in the hope that "something will run in parallel right?" and you spend all your time context switching between threads and not getting any work done.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Sadly many programmers just can't do threads properly, and worse still many believe that they can.

You either get stuff that doesn't matter put into other threads which just injects communication delays for no benefit, or worse you get a sea of thousands of threads in the hope that "something will run in parallel right?" and you spend all your time context switching between threads and not getting any work done.

Well the devs need to find people who can code properly!

Making everything single thread limited might work for non-intensive games but it won't work for more complex ones,as simply most gamers won't overclock,have the fastest RAM(which usually helps these kind of games) and the IPC increases are getting harder and harder too. Plus consoles will always have lower power CPUs,so if they hope to make money in that market they need to find ways of balancing loads between cores effective otherwise no one will buy their games over devs who can find ways to do things better.

[badass]

Sadly most programmers just can't do programming properly, and worse still many believe that they can.

FTFY

Seriously - the demand for coding vastly outstripped the supply of competent coders about 2 decades ago. Hence the state of software today.
The industry average is around 20-30 bugs per 1000 lines of code.

Another way of looking a it is that appx. every 30th line of code contains a bug. That's after release so after code review (that happens, right?.....right?) and testing.

Now think about a car - or anything else that is manufactured. Think of how many thousands of components they are made of. Now imagine every 30th component had a defect. Pretty much no car would work when it left the factory.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

FTFY

Seriously - the demand for coding vastly outstripped the supply of competent coders about 2 decades ago. Hence the state of software today.
The industry average is around 20-30 bugs per 1000 lines of code.

Another way of looking a it is that appx. every 30th line of code contains a bug. That's after release so after code review (that happens, right?.....right?) and testing.

Now think about a car - or anything else that is manufactured. Think of how many thousands of components they are made of. Now imagine every 30th component had a defect. Pretty much no car would work when it left the factory.

Its probably because as with most industries there was probably a race to the bottom and people decided to do something else. Now companies are paying for it.