Hi,
I've got a question about future PC gaming and engines. I know that every new engine is wrote with massive parallelization in mind, like Frostbite or CryEngine 3.
So what will be better for those engines in term of 'future proof' processor - i5, which is 2 cores+HT that give us 4 threads, or quad core/old version of i5 without HT/x4?
We all know that for now in most application i5 is faster than quad core, but will it change if engine will not virtually but psyhically use all 4 cores? HyperThreading as we know just splits one core for 2 virtual ones and manage core ressources for those 2 threads, in applications that dont use all cpu cycles its quite efficient, but if application really needs 4 real threads at one moment it should stall, right?
And what will be better Phenom X6 [6 real cores] vs i7 [4 cores, 8 threads] in those engines?
Do greater cache memory really matters in those game engines calculations?
I've got a question about future PC gaming and engines. I know that every new engine is wrote with massive parallelization in mind, like Frostbite or CryEngine 3.
So what will be better for those engines in term of 'future proof' processor - i5, which is 2 cores+HT that give us 4 threads, or quad core/old version of i5 without HT/x4?
We all know that for now in most application i5 is faster than quad core, but will it change if engine will not virtually but psyhically use all 4 cores? HyperThreading as we know just splits one core for 2 virtual ones and manage core ressources for those 2 threads, in applications that dont use all cpu cycles its quite efficient, but if application really needs 4 real threads at one moment it should stall, right?
And what will be better Phenom X6 [6 real cores] vs i7 [4 cores, 8 threads] in those engines?
Do greater cache memory really matters in those game engines calculations?