add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

When will 6 cores become outdated for gaming?

connor333

11 months ago

I think I need to unfollow a professional youtuber because he makes me neurotic about my recent build I'm striving for. He swears to go for 8 cores minimum, nothing less than ryzen 7 and to not buy the i5 or i7 8700k because they are 6 cores only.

Ryzen is great if you strive for multitasking and don't want 144hz, but that's what I'm shooting for.

Would like to hear thoughts from ppl that are more experienced than I am with CPU's.

PS. I'm shooting for either 8600k or i7 8700k for my build.

Comments

  • 11 months ago
  • 5 points

Sounds to me like they don't know what they're talking about, I mean like come on... It was the same thing when quad-cores where the new thing, it's like yeah there's always going to be more cores, faster cores better CPUs in general but if video game companies only made game for the bleeding edge... They'd be out of business, it'll take quite awhile for developers to just drop 6-cores considering dual cores are still viable.

  • 11 months ago
  • 5 points

The guy is a damn idiot. Unsubscribe to him so you don't damage any brain cells. Has he not looked at benchmarks? Or know what SMT/hyperthreading is? For crying out loud a 2c/4t Pentium can still play games.

[comment deleted]
[comment deleted by staff]
  • 11 months ago
  • 2 points

If the guy is spewing out clueless garbage then you need to unfollow him. I can only imagine that he's never tried to develop any software and hasn't run into the issues of trying to get more cores to work together. Hint: Amdahl's law was formulated in 1967 (about the same time as Moore's law) and still governs just how effective multiple cores are.

Vagabond's response to your other thread is pretty telling: "You would be paying about $100 more for a few more FPS. Not even remotely worth it for just gaming. https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_9700K/13.html"

It is very telling that both the PS4 and Xbox1 have 8 [wimpy] cores, yet console ports of them hardly require that many cores. We don't know how many cores the next generation of consoles will have (although I'd expect Zen cores, unless AMD graphics sours the deal), but it will do nothing to repeal Amdahl's law.

You just need to unfollow this guy. I'd still recommend i7 9700k over the i7 8700k because it is easier to cram the power into two cores (even if they are #7 and #8 than to spread it over 6 additional threads [and 6 threads barely equal one core anyway]), but that's only comparing 6 cores/12 threads vs. 8 cores/8 threads. By the time we need more than 6 cores you will be looking for your second GPU replacement anyway.

  • 11 months ago
  • 2 points

Worry not, developer's will always target the mass audience. They develop games to make money, Steam do not make money when people demand refunds. The mass audience do not roll with 32 core CPU's and Titan RTX's. Most casual gamers (whom make up the largest audience in PC gaming) do not invest several thousands in a gaming PC.

I built my Nephew a Pentium G5500 with 8GB Ram and a GTX1050Ti 4GB model. It runs games believe it or not, every single friggin title we could throw at it. Sure there are titles like Ghost Recon Wildlands and Assassin's Creed Origins which required us to dial down settings to a mix of Medium and High to play at 30fps or better, but most games ran A-OK. 60fps or better was common. This with a very humble Dual Core in the Pentium. I bet I could run most titles on an even more humble dual core Celeron as long as the Mobo had a PCIE x 16 slot for a GPU. Heck, that Dual core Pentium even runs Cemu and we can get Breath of the Wild up to around 30fps - which is a better frame rate than the original on the Wii U! This is emulation we talking about. I also tried Dolphin and that little dual core ran everything I threw at it.

Forget the Professional Youtuber and trust what your fellow PC users tell you. A 2core, let alone a 6core, will handle most you throw at it, at least in a gaming sense. Of course, today, it is best to future proof your stuff. If I were in the market for a new PC, I would definitely not get anything below a 6 core, but that is because future proofing comes in. A 4 core today for gaming is absolutely all you need. A 6 core i7 adds in the element of future proofing - in that 3 or 4 years from now it will still play the new games of the day without being a severe bottleneck.

Any of the Kabylake/Skylake i5's or i7's, which are now old 4 core processors will breeze through 99.9% of games out there. It will be a long time before they will not handle games handily. A 6 core CPU is absolutely swell today, maybe even overkill for pure gaming purposes. While this whole AMD 8 core vs Intel 6 core is moot for gaming at the front end of 2K or 4K, at 1080p, most reliable sources I read or watch show the Intel 6 core coming out well ahead in the "ridiculously high frame rate" battle where the CPU is more likely to be a bottleneck vs a high end GPU. The difference becomes more trivial when the GPU is bottlenecking the frame rates.

While I think the Ryzen 7 is a fantastic chip and a superior in some tasks over the i7, the i7 has not proven iteself to be a slouch at all. The same applies to the i5. Hell, even the i3-8350K 4 core is an outstanding chip. That Youtube guy you follow probably is an AMD fanboy and might have had several restless nights when the 8 core i9 came out with monstrous overclocking and benchmarks that will probably see the 10core Ryzen 7 2800X come out shortly. Cores are a marketing strategy at the moment, it is a stupid fad and overkill for the majority of PC users.

  • 11 months ago
  • 1 point

I'd go with a 9700k on a new gaming build, unless you're really tight for money.

A 9700k or 9900k will 100% do well for gaming even at high refresh rates and resolutions, until well into the 7nm chip era.

  • 11 months ago
  • 1 point

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/QNX2FT/asrock-z370-extreme4-atx-lga1151-motherboard-z370-extreme4

I have this motherboard shipped to my home and I can't find solid answer in regards to 9th gen chips working on it without bios update. And I don't have an 8th gen cpu lying around to get it working. Any idea if that motherboard would work?

  • 11 months ago
  • 1 point

They need a bios update because the 9700/9900 chips didn't exist when the board was made. IIRC the cheapest processor that will work in that board will be a Celeron G4900.

However, If you don't have the money to afford a new Z390 board you should probably just get the 8700k.

  • 11 months ago
  • 2 points

Bonus: The 8700k last I checked was cheaper than the 9700k and the performance difference in gaming was small. It's still a great choice.

  • 11 months ago
  • -3 points

If you're doing video editing and streaming 8 core minimum for a gaming rig. Video editing of your video games takes a lot of time to compile. Depending on the size, for example a 4 core single threat will take handbake 8 hours to compress a total 30-40 gb of videos files. Having 8 core multiple thread will cut it down to an hour or so.

Streaming your video through twitch needs a lot cores to give maximum quality.

My next build is will be Ryzen 3850 16 core multiple thread with 32 or 64 gb of ram.

[comment deleted]
  • 11 months ago
  • -3 points

16 threads is more than 4 threads.

4 core single thread vs 8 core multiple threads (ie 16 threads). Having more cores means future proof. That's what I'm investing in the future not now. With that said there are games that now recommend i9 CPU.

AMD push the core count that means software developers will push the core count. Software developers will use all the cores available to them.

  • 11 months ago
  • 2 points

Are... Are you the youtuber?

  • 11 months ago
  • 1 point

Not anymore. I don't post my videos on YouTube due to their censorships. I now upload my videos to bitchute.

Here is my bitchute channel.

https://www.bitchute.com/channel/kgluong/

  • 11 months ago
  • 1 point

lol!

[comment deleted]
[comment deleted]
[comment deleted]
  • 11 months ago
  • 2 points

Agree, classic elitism.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube