Will the Core2 architecture be sufficient for games in 12 months time?? Do we even need high powered processors which graphics card now capable of handling things like physics for a much lower cost?? How is AMD going to respond??
Will the Core2 architecture be sufficient for games in 12 months time?? Do we even need high powered processors which graphics card now capable of handling things like physics for a much lower cost?? How is AMD going to respond??
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 03-11-2008 at 09:47 PM.
Im going for an i7 approach is good for encoding and such, but the price of upgrading to i7 for a few fps isnt worth it.
A e8600 clocked to hell, with a biostart ip45 and a couple of 4850 in cross-fire should be more than enough for small to medium resolutions, hell im still playing all games on high bar crysis with a res of 1440x900 and my g80 8800gts was bought last march 07.
I highly doubt that Core i7 will have a big affect on gaming as a 2.4GHz dual core does fine at the moment. They aren't even taking advantage of quads yet so it will be a while still.
anyway. all the tests i've seen have only given it an extra few fps. it may score big in benchmarks but in real life its not worth it yet.
Not unless something major happens and a dual gpu system actually becomes really common/good
Also remember that games generally get aimed at the largest market (the mid range) and it's going to be a while before the majority of gamers have moved off c2d to c2q or i7
I agree and I'm going to laugh heartily as all those people who bought Q6600s "cos hey they are gonna last and the best value and they make the tea before you get out of bed in the morning", overclocked them to 3.2/3,6Ghz, start buying i7s even though their own processors will cut it in gaming for the next 2 years+. Some people just have to spend the money or they feel they are losing ground or losing out.
Graphics cards are always going to be of far more importance than the latest cpu. We are now really only seeing the time (last 6 months) when an overclocked 939 Opteron 146 @3ghz is past it's sell by date, that is a single core cpu is limiting FPS because it can't support a modern card in the latest games yet it will happily play 95%+ of the games on the market with a modern graphics card at normal resolutions (1680x1050 and below). Iirc they were launched in the UK @ Dec 2004/Jan 2005.
There will always be a time when the processor can't handle it for gaming, but it takes a lot longer than people think and even longer before those cpu's can't do WinXP, office, internets, etc.
However, the race is always there and people's hearts pound and their palms get sweaty and their green eyes smoulder as their mate gets 100 more 3D '06/08/25/79 marks than their rig, so out comes the wallet and round and round they dance, slashing ever higher up the walls!
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
As soon as we start seeing games that use more than 4 cores correctly, than i7 will really become valuable.
Every game I know of will run fine on any dual core 3ghz processor and, unfortunately, it will remain that way until quad cores become much more common.
However, i7 will be great at playing 2 games at once...
None.
It will have no effect on gaming as we know it.
Yes, But this CPU really shines in the server department and offers little advantage in gaming.
Graphics cards are whats most important for games, this CPU is best for people who do alot of 3D Rendering and Video Encoding, where the multithreading comes into play.Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
That's what I'm waiting to find out, Im in no rush to upgrade I'll wait and see what AMD has to offer before I part with my cash. Most people don't expect much from AMD, I'm a little more hopefull though.Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
From a gaming point of view, the Core i7 is incremental. A slight increase in performance over Penryn and even Kentsfield Quads.
From a server point of view, AMD have just lost. They are now overtaken performance wise by intel in every area. The Quad core Opterons were untouchable performance wise for things like virtualisation by any intel CPU before.
So the Core i7 will make no difference to gaming.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
you forget, Deneb is coming very soon and AMD are saying it should clock past 3ghz easily, nto to mention one has been spotted running at 4ghz
The current Phenoms will clock to 4GHz with the right tinkering, here's hoping that Deneb will be an easier prospect and after all we don't really need it to go 4GHz mid 3's is probably good enough most of the time!
Yet how does it perform even at those speeds? Clockspeed isn't the sole reason (or in fact anything to do with the reason) AMD lost the performance title.
I will be pleasently surprised if deneb even matches Core 2 clock for clock, let alone i7. I'm also sure Intel could knock out a 4ghz nehalem quite easily if they needed to -or just increase the cache - there's room for improvement already as I think they're just starting off low due to lack of competition and to give them room to increase the line up over time.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)