Deneb Samples are almost out

[donitsi]

AM3 procs in Q1

[gosh]

Most of the 3D stuff is done by GPU, unless using software renderer. For example pathfinding for AI can be very heavy for the CPU and for branch predictor, due to it's recursive nature and continuous state checks.

OT (again)
I don't think AI is having a lot of conditions, the worst thing that can happen to a developer is spaghetti code. Developing good AI needs some thinking about this. Developing applications in teams also need code that is easy to understand and AI might be one area where you need to think very much about how it is implemented in order to avoid bugs, spaghetti etc and make the code simple for other developers.
A lot of conditions makes the code very hard to read and hard to debug for errors.

[Manicdan]

if a game used an AI so good that you had to get a physx like card to run it, i would buy it if it really meant the AI was that awesome. but for most games mobs feel really stupid, and it seems like devlopers will use AI boosts to make the difficult settings the realest, i would prefer if ez mode had the smartest bots out there, but hit for almost no damage, so you can still enjoy their work without hating every level.

[Nedjo]

CPU's prime concern today in games is to feed GPU with geometry and to process driver calls... Physix and AI are less concern on todays games, and those task can be very well threaded (UT3 is good example... Crysis also moves physix to a different thread than the main rendering thread).

Thanks to the design of todays DualGPU solutions, having the fast as possible CPU is a recomendation...

IMHO CPU testing in games should be done with CF or SLI setups in Highest possible settings, so that true value of the faster CPU could be transpired!

[STaRGaZeR]

Thanks to the design of todays DualGPU solutions, having the fast as possible CPU is a recomendation...

LOL.

So now CPU matters for playing, huh? I can remember a legion of fanatics (you included) that kept saying no long time ago something like "eh, buy Phenom, GPU is really where you'll see gains. You will be good with a low end CPU as long as your GFX is powerful". While you were right, you were right only with exceptions. Now you say that.

Seriously what a bunch of hypocrites.

[demonkevy666]

lol

it really depends on the game mostly.

Crysis like's high core clocks

Grid:race driver likes threads and GPU's

UT3 can use physics and threads.

[Rammsteiner]

Let me just say this: 15 - 20% IPC gains from a die shrink would be absolutely incredible and unheard of, but many here seem to think its a realistic figure? 15 - 20% improvements are more akin to an architectural overhaul, for example K8 -> K10 gained about that much.

Just as a point of comparison, Penryn gained on average 5 - 6% per clock through a larger cache and several minor architectural improvements. AMD would have to work miracles to get 15 - 20% gains from Deneb, frankly I very much doubt it but I would be more than happy to eat humble pie if proven wrong.

You've a point, but it's not an unknown thing Deneb does consist out of more than just a die shrink and will have some improvements left and right.

But your example of Intel's move does show improvement/clock is possible, but it also shows something else. Penryn is/was a very good architecture. Nobody can seriously deny that. Now, they say 'Dont fix what's not broken', but also you cant fix what's not broken. Now Agena, with the start of B2, the quick fix of B3 (not argumenting whether TLB is gone or not), K10 is simply not a perfect architecture, there are some flaws. Now if those flaws are more obvious than Intel's, if AMD managed to find a lot of flaws, high bottlenecking flaws etc, they can all fix that with Deneb.

Therefor your argument 'Intel only gained 5~6%, so 20% for AMD is impossible' isnt completely valid either. Now I know AMD made some weird claims before the launch of Barcelone, then again, I'd never take such claims, either from AMD or Intel, serious. I do take it with me in my arguments, but not as being completely convinced, it can only help you in your arguments.

[koosjebram]

LOL.

So now CPU matters for playing, huh? I can remember a legion of fanatics (you included) that kept saying no long time ago something like "eh, buy Phenom, GPU is really where you'll see gains. You will be good with a low end CPU as long as your GFX is powerful". While you were right, you were right only with exceptions. Now you say that.

Seriously what a bunch of hypocrites.

This used to be the case , but i think now is the turning point.
Looking at the Guru3d multi GPU review with i7 it's clear that today's triple SLI and quadfire demand for so much info that the CPU does matter a lot.
I wonder in which direction this is headed....if GPU's keep getting more horsepower en games are gonna be more threaded the CPU's are going to be more and more important for games and multiple core scaling should also matter more.
Damn i do hope Deneb comes out soon , then there should be some more usefull info in this thread

[Jacky]

But isn't the sole philosophy of a die-shrink to be conservative? The new process introduces unknowns and problems of its own, so if you are too agressive, and AMD was already too agressive with K10, the chance for a mess-up is even higher. So we'd need to know if AMD is going the agressive route of short-cuts once again? Even though this strategy (rushing things out of the door, "taking short-cuts") lead to the TLB-erratum in the first place.
That sounds like high risk gambling to me, but maybe it's their only hope.
Intel's Nehalem w/o the turbo is also closer to a 15% overall gain over it's predecessor, similar to K10 over K8. So should we assume that nehalem is somehow broken too?

[clayton]

LOL.

So now CPU matters for playing, huh? I can remember a legion of fanatics (you included) that kept saying no long time ago something like "eh, buy Phenom, GPU is really where you'll see gains. You will be good with a low end CPU as long as your GFX is powerful". While you were right, you were right only with exceptions. Now you say that.

Seriously what a bunch of hypocrites.

Still my first gaming-pc priority.

[STaRGaZeR]

This used to be the case , but i think now is the turning point.
Looking at the Guru3d multi GPU review with i7 it's clear that today's triple SLI and quadfire demand for so much info that the CPU does matter a lot.
I wonder in which direction this is headed....if GPU's keep getting more horsepower en games are gonna be more threaded the CPU's are going to be more and more important for games and multiple core scaling should also matter more.
Damn i do hope Deneb comes out soon , then there should be some more usefull info in this thread

Or course, you're right. That was specifically pointed at the retards that would sell his/her mother for a certain company. A CPU without a GPU is nothing. A GPU without CPU is nothing. You need balance. You'll be always bottlenecked by one of those, so you choose which one looking at your priorities.

[Shintai]

Or course, you're right. That was specifically pointed at the retards that would sell his/her mother for a certain company. A CPU without a GPU is nothing. A GPU without CPU is nothing. You need balance. You'll be always bottlenecked by one of those, so you choose which one looking at your priorities.

Not true. A CPU can work perfectly fine without a GPU. The other way is not possible. And there are many boxes around the world with no GPU, even for 2D.

[STaRGaZeR]

Not true. A CPU can work perfectly fine without a GPU. The other way is not possible. And there are many boxes around the world with no GPU, even for 2D.

I forgot the for gaming, we are talking about that anyways

[Rammsteiner]

But still, when you actually use such high-end GPU's you often do that for a reason no? Because of a big screen. When you've a big screen, it matters less what CPU you've.

To get the max FPS out of a HD4870X2 CFX/Triple 280GTX SLI setup, yes, faster CPU with a small screen helps. But, it could be me really, I cant be arsed if I get 300fps or 500fps at a 800x600 resolution.

You have about no significant bottlenecks when you play 1920x1200 or even higher really. Most dual cores are already enough to get the best results.

For me anyway, GPU matters a lot more over my CPU. It always have been and unless CPU's do get a major role in gaming, it will always be that way.

Those stupid AMD vs Intel benches where we're looking at 100fps vs 150fps, so what. Most high-end CPU's, therefor mid range CPU's from Intel are more than enough to game perfectly. Ive been gaming for ~5 months on a stock clocked 9850BE and DDR800 5-5-5 timings and Ive had no issues at all. OC'd it would only have been better, a OC'd Intel can do it even better than that, but in the end you wont even notice it anymore.

As soon as some new technology is introduced into games your current 500fps is going to suck as much as someone else's 200fps CPU, just like GPU's. A 6800Ultra ain't going to give you the same quality and fps as a 4870 is giving you despite you had to pay quite a lot for it, despite it might have been king of the hill.

[Nedjo]

LOL.

So now CPU matters for playing, huh? I can remember a legion of fanatics (you included) that kept saying no long time ago something like "eh, buy Phenom, GPU is really where you'll see gains. You will be good with a low end CPU as long as your GFX is powerful". While you were right, you were right only with exceptions. Now you say that.

Seriously what a bunch of hypocrites.

dude what's your problem? Wasn't I specific with DualGPU remark?!

driver overhead of those systems does put additional load on the CPU, and due to clear future of those solutions, yeah CPU will play more significant role in expressing true power of those solutions...

In the department of singleGPU accelerators, this are much more different!

I find your "hypocrites" objection insulting, but will not respond in similar fashion, I'll just say that I'm nowhere being fanatic I'm just realistic and not generalize these complex topics like CPU+GPU combo...

[Rammsteiner]

I find your "hypocrites" objection insulting, but will not respond in similar fashion, I'll just say that I'm nowhere being fanatic I'm just realistic and not generalize these complex topics like CPU+GPU combo...

Indeed.

Otherwise Ill wait for a VIA GPU But seriously though, nothing hypocrit going on really, I can think of more hypocrit stuff to troll about

[STaRGaZeR]

dude what's your problem? Wasn't I specific with DualGPU remark?!

driver overhead of those systems does put additional load on the CPU, and due to clear future of those solutions, yeah CPU will play more significant role in expressing true power of those solutions...

In the department of singleGPU accelerators, this are much more different!

I find your "hypocrites" objection insulting, but will not respond in similar fashion, I'll just say that I'm nowhere being fanatic I'm just realistic and not generalize these complex topics like CPU+GPU combo...

Do you really want me to find your posts where you were recommending people in this forum to save money buying a less powerful CPU (cheap Phenom or C2D instead of a C2Q) to buy a 4870X2 or a Crossfire system instead?

Do I have to find our little bet about some 3DMark06 2,4GHz vs. 3,0GHz HD3870 Crossfire numbers? Oh wait I can't do it, you got owned and never posted the results. But I don't care about 3DMark so this one is not that important. Back then you didn't have any idea about how much of an impact CPU can do in a multiGPU environment. But guess what, now that lots of Nehalem reviews are showing the importance of a really powerful CPU, specially in multiGPU environments, now it's important. Let me tell you one thing dude, it already was important before all this.

Hypocrite is not an insult, but if you find it like that stop doing what hypocrites do and nobody will call you that. And the "you offend me, I'm not a fanatic, I'm realistic" victim perfomance is quite funny to say the least. There are many fanboys here, and we all know who they are. You don't need to justify yourselves spreading even more BS.

[Periander6]

http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/s...2001228&pgno=1

[Bellisimo]

But guess what, now that lots of Nehalem reviews are showing the importance of a really powerful CPU, specially in multiGPU environments, now it's important. Let me tell you one thing dude, it already was important before all this.

only superior scaling in quadfire and 3-way SLI

[gosh]

But guess what, now that lots of Nehalem reviews are showing the importance of a really powerful CPU, specially in multiGPU environments, now it's important. Let me tell you one thing dude, it already was important before all this.

Don't forget to buy a superfast monitor that can display all those fps, you also need superfast eyes.
No game exist today that need a very fast CPU what I know of.

[Hornet331]

Don't forget to buy a superfast monitor that can display all those fps, you also need superfast eyes.
No game exist today that need a very fast CPU what I know of.

welcome to eraly 2007 -> supreme commander.

[Epsilon84]

Don't forget to buy a superfast monitor that can display all those fps, you also need superfast eyes.
No game exist today that need a very fast CPU what I know of.

FSX?

[Macadamia]

FSX?

FSX is poor coding. Most of the ****ery can be offloaded to geometry shaders, if performance on both ATI/nVidia cards (GS) wasn't so poor.

[Hornet331]

FSX?

another one -> pcsx2

[JumpingJack]

Don't forget to buy a superfast monitor that can display all those fps, you also need superfast eyes.
No game exist today that need a very fast CPU what I know of.

No you don't, you need a total system (CPU + GPU) fast enough to keep the minimum FPS above the refresh rate of your monitor. This will ensure the best game play experience, and the reason to maximize the output of the FPS metric. Actual game play should should be set to vertical sync.


Most monitors today are LCD with a standard 60 Hz refresh rate.