When buying a processor, many people try to choose something cooler, with several cores and a high clock speed. But few people know what the number of processor cores actually affects. Why, for example, can a regular and simple dual-core processor be faster than a quad-core processor, or the same “percent” with 4 cores be faster than a “percent” with 8 cores. This is a rather interesting topic that is definitely worth understanding in more detail.

Introduction

Before we begin to understand what the number of processor cores affects, I would like to make a small digression. Just a few years ago, CPU developers were confident that manufacturing technologies, which are developing so rapidly, would allow them to produce “stones” with clock speeds of up to 10 GHz, which would allow users to forget about problems with poor performance. However, success was not achieved.

No matter how the technological process developed, both Intel and AMD ran into purely physical limitations that simply did not allow them to produce processors with a clock frequency of up to 10 GHz. Then it was decided to focus not on frequencies, but on the number of cores. Thus, a new race began to produce more powerful and productive processor “crystals”, which continues to this day, but not as actively as it was at first.

Intel and AMD processors

Today, Intel and AMD are direct competitors in the processor market. When looking at revenue and sales, the Blues have a clear advantage, although the Reds have been struggling to keep up lately. Both companies have a good range of ready-made solutions for all occasions - from a simple processor with 1-2 cores to real monsters with more than 8 cores. Typically, such “stones” are used on special work “computers” that have a narrow focus .

Intel

So, today Intel has successful 5 types of processors: Celeron, Pentium, and i7. Each of these "stones" has a different number of cores and is designed for different tasks. For example, Celeron has only 2 cores and is used mainly on office and home computers. Pentium, or, as it is also called, “stump”, is also used at home, but already has much better performance, primarily due to Hyper-Threading technology, which “adds” two more virtual cores to the physical two cores, which are called threads . Thus, a dual-core “percent” works like the most budget quad-core processor, although this is not entirely correct, but this is the main point.

As for the Core line, the situation is approximately the same. The younger model with the number 3 has 2 cores and 2 threads. The older line - Core i5 - already has full-fledged 4 or 6 cores, but lacks the Hyper-Threading function and does not have additional threads, except for 4-6 standard ones. Well, the last thing - core i7 - these are top-end processors, which, as a rule, have from 4 to 6 cores and twice as many threads, i.e., for example, 4 cores and 8 threads or 6 cores and 12 threads.

AMD

Now it’s worth talking about AMD. The list of “pebbles” from this company is huge, there is no point in listing everything, since most of the models are simply outdated. It is perhaps worth noting the new generation, which in a sense “copies” Intel - Ryzen. This line also contains models with numbers 3, 5 and 7. The main difference from Ryzen’s “blue” ones is that the youngest model immediately provides full 4 cores, while the older one has not 6, but eight. In addition, the number of threads changes. Ryzen 3 - 4 threads, Ryzen 5 - 8-12 (depending on the number of cores - 4 or 6) and Ryzen 7 - 16 threads.

It is worth mentioning another “red” line - FX, which appeared in 2012, and, in fact, this platform is already considered obsolete, but thanks to the fact that now more and more programs and games are starting to support multi-threading, the Vishera line is again has gained popularity, which, along with low prices, is only growing.

Well, as for the disputes regarding the processor frequency and the number of cores, then, in fact, it is more correct to look towards the second, since everyone has long ago decided on clock frequencies, and even top models from Intel operate at nominal 2.7, 2.8 , 3 GHz. In addition, the frequency can always be increased using overclocking, but in the case of a dual-core processor this will not give much effect.

How to find out how many cores

If someone does not know how to determine the number of processor cores, then this can be done easily and simply, even without downloading and installing separate special programs. Just go to the "Device Manager" and click on the small arrow next to the "Processors" item.

You can get more detailed information about what technologies your “stone” supports, what its clock frequency is, its revision number and much more using a special and small program called CPU-Z. You can download it for free on the official website. There is a version that does not require installation.

The advantage of two cores

What could be the advantage of a dual-core processor? There are many things, for example, in games or applications, in the development of which single-threaded work was the main priority. Take the game Wold of Tanks as an example. The most common dual-core processors such as Pentium or Celeron will produce quite decent performance results, while some FX from AMD or INTEL Core will use much more of their capabilities, and the result will be approximately the same.

The better 4 cores

How can 4 cores be better than two? Better performance. Quad-core “stones” are designed for more serious work, where simple “stumps” or “celerons” simply cannot cope. An excellent example here would be any 3D graphics program, such as 3Ds Max or Cinema4D.

During the rendering process, these programs use maximum computer resources, including RAM and processor. Dual-core CPUs will be very slow in render processing time, and the more complex the scene, the longer they will take. But processors with four cores will cope with this task much faster, since additional threads will come to their aid.

Of course, you can take some budget “protsik” from the Core i3 family, for example, the 6100 model, but 2 cores and 2 additional threads will still be inferior to a full-fledged quad-core one.

6 and 8 cores

Well, the last segment of multi-cores is processors with six and eight cores. Their main purpose, in principle, is exactly the same as that of the CPU above, only they are needed where ordinary “fours” cannot cope. In addition, full-fledged specialized computers are built on the basis of “stones” with 6 and 8 cores, which will be “tailored” for a specific activity, for example, video editing, 3D modeling programs, rendering ready-made heavy scenes with a large number of polygons and objects, etc. .d.

In addition, such multi-core processors perform very well when working with archivers or in applications that require good computing capabilities. In games that are optimized for multi-threading, such processors have no equal.

What is affected by the number of processor cores?

So, what else can the number of cores affect? First of all, to increase energy consumption. Yes, as surprising as this may sound, it is true. There is no need to worry too much, because in everyday life this problem, so to speak, will not be noticeable.

The second is heating. The more cores, the better the cooling system is needed. A program called AIDA64 will help you measure the processor temperature. When starting, you need to click on “Computer” and then select “Sensors”. You need to monitor the temperature of the processor, because if it constantly overheats or operates at too high temperatures, then after some time it will simply burn out.

Dual-core processors are unfamiliar with this problem, because they do not have very high performance and heat dissipation, respectively, but multi-core processors do. The hottest stones are those from AMD, especially the FX series. For example, take the FX-6300 model. The processor temperature in the AIDA64 program is around 40 degrees and this is in idle mode. Under load, the number will increase and if overheating occurs, the computer will turn off. So, when buying a multi-core processor, you should not forget about the cooler.

What else does the number of processor cores affect? For multitasking. Dual-core processors will not be able to provide stable performance when running two, three or more programs simultaneously. The simplest example is streamers on the Internet. In addition to the fact that they are playing some game at high settings, they simultaneously run a program that allows them to broadcast gameplay to the Internet online; they also have an Internet browser with several open pages, where the player, as a rule, reads comments people watching it and monitors other information. Not even every multi-core processor can provide proper stability, not to mention dual- and single-core processors.

It’s also worth saying a few words that multi-core processors have a very useful thing called “L3 cache”. This cache has a certain amount of memory into which various information about running programs, performed actions, etc. is constantly recorded. All this is needed in order to increase the speed of the computer and its performance. For example, if a person often uses Photoshop, then this information will be stored in memory, and the time to launch and open the program will be significantly reduced.

Summarizing

Summarizing the conversation about what the number of processor cores affects, we can come to one simple conclusion: if you need good performance, speed, multitasking, work in heavy applications, the ability to comfortably play modern games, etc., then your choice is processor with four cores or more. If you need a simple “computer” for office or home use, which will be used to a minimum, then 2 cores are what you need. In any case, when choosing a processor, first of all you need to analyze all your needs and tasks, and only then consider any options.

22.10.2015 16:55

Not just reviews. This is exactly how we should start today’s article, which will become another useful link in our “” section, in which we rarely, but still, conduct research not on specific products, but on the useful capabilities that such devices carry.

The test results obtained eloquently indicate that there is no need to install a powerful processor in a home gaming system.

We remember about three key devices in a personal computer that every gamer needs: processor, RAM and video card. Now the IT world is moving towards reducing power and miniaturizing PCs, but powerful systems and productive games have not yet been canceled. Which means inherent in every enthusiast collection rules competent machines will live for a long time.

Everyone knows that the key PC component that affects the number of frames per second in any gaming application is the video adapter. The more powerful it is, the greater the resolution and detail of the picture the user can afford. Everything here is more or less simple.

Everything is also clear with RAM, because its quantity, and even its frequency (in almost 100% of cases), do not in any way affect the game fps. gold standard today it is 8 GB, but we dare to assure you that 4 GB is quite enough to run your favorite games.

It's much more important to have more videos in 2015 brains(and here 4 GB is no longer enough, especially for ).

And finally heart of the system- a processor that can do so much and mean so much, but still remains somewhat dark theme for players.

Two, four or six cores; three, four or still two and a half gigahertz? There are enough questions for the CPU (and then there’s the notorious unlocking potential powerful video cards), but not many answers are given in the media, the most important thing is that they do not pop up as often as users demand.

Everyone knows that the key PC component that affects the number of frames per second in any gaming application is the video adapter.

What processor is needed for modern games? And what video card should I choose for it? This is what we decided to look into.

Participants of today's answers to questions Intel processors of different generations (fourth, fifth and sixth) became available. Why are there no devices from AMD? Yes, because AMD itself is practically gone. Do you remember the last time this company released high-performance desktop processors? We remind you that this was in 2011, Bulldozer architecture (AMD K11) at 32 nm. We are promised AMD Zen () in 2016, but can we trust the meager information available? Time will show.

So, we have three different processors, three different platforms and three different sockets (even memory standards vary).

There is reason to believe that even Intel Core i3 processors with 4 MB of cache and Hyper-Threading technology will be enough for any gaming applications.

However, we have one video card for all systems - the key aspect of today's testing, which levels all three platforms with each other, giving the desired answer in the title. And it is she who will have to process the image in all test games.

The screen resolution in applications is Full HD (perhaps this is still the most popular and standard format for displaying game images). Graphics quality settings are maximum.

For the purity of the experiments, each of the processors was even overclocked in order to reflect in even more detail the influence of CPU power on the final frame/s (or the lack of this influence). Although after the first results it became obvious that there was no point in overclocking, and it turned out to be impossible.

Test stand:

First system:

Second system:

Third system:

The test results obtained eloquently indicate that there is no need to install a powerful processor in a home gaming system. Additional physical cores are of no use, as is the clock speed (which negates the open multiplier in processors with the “K” suffix for the stated purpose). The key factor is still the video card.

As you can see, one of the most powerful single-chip adapters is capable of to uncover even the initial series Intel Core i5. Indeed, you can observe some difference in fps between an overclocked processor and a default one or a six-core and a four-core one, but in all games and benchmarks it does not exceed 15%. The only exception was the game GTA V (this line has always been famous for its extreme processor dependence), but even in it 50-60 frames/s is enough for anyone gaming maniac. There are hardly any users who can notice the difference by eye between 70 and 100 fps.

There is reason to believe that even Intel Core i3 processors with 4 MB of cache and Hyper-Threading technology will be enough for any gaming applications. The situation is somewhat reminiscent of a combination with two adapters, the use of which is practically not noticeable compared to a single, but powerful 3D accelerator, but there is more than enough hassle with setting up.

Games are not tasks where quantity is important; optimization and the developers’ ideas are more important here (as a rule, they try to target their products to the widest possible audience of users, including those with weak systems).

If you are a gamer and still face the dilemma of choosing the right processor, do not rush to spend hundreds of extra dollars on a powerful CPU (and especially with an unlocked multiplier). Better take a closer look at a more powerful video card or a functional motherboard. Such a purchase will make much more sense.

ASUS STRIX GTX 980 Ti in all cases

Many players mistakenly consider a powerful video card to be the main thing in games, but this is not entirely true. Of course, many graphics settings do not affect the CPU in any way, but only affect the graphics card, but this does not change the fact that the processor is not used in any way during the game. In this article, we will take a detailed look at the principle of CPU operation in games, tell you why a powerful device is needed and its impact in games.

As you know, the CPU transmits commands from external devices to the system, performs operations and transfers data. The speed of execution of operations depends on the number of cores and other characteristics of the processor. All its functions are actively used when you turn on any game. Let's take a closer look at a few simple examples:

Processing user commands

Almost all games use externally connected peripherals in some way, be it a keyboard or a mouse. They control vehicles, characters or certain objects. The processor receives commands from the player and transmits them to the program itself, where the programmed action is carried out almost without delay.

This task is one of the largest and most complex. Therefore, there is often a delay in response when moving if the game does not have enough processor power. This does not affect the number of frames in any way, but it is almost impossible to control.

Generating random objects

Many items in games do not always appear in the same place. Let's take as an example the usual garbage in the game GTA 5. The game engine, using the processor, decides to generate an object at a certain time in a specified location.

That is, objects are not random at all, but they are created according to certain algorithms thanks to the computing power of the processor. In addition, it is worth considering the presence of a large number of different random objects; the engine transmits instructions to the processor what exactly needs to be generated. From this it turns out that a more diverse world with a large number of non-persistent objects requires high CPU power to generate what is needed.

NPC behavior

Let's look at this parameter using the example of open-world games, so it will be more clear. NPCs are all characters that are not controlled by the player, they are programmed to do certain actions when certain stimuli appear. For example, if you open fire from a weapon in GTA 5, the crowd will simply scatter in different directions; they will not perform individual actions, because this requires a large amount of processor resources.

In addition, in open-world games, random events never occur that the main character does not see. For example, on a sports ground, no one will play football if you don’t see it and are standing around the corner. Everything revolves only around the main character. The engine will not do anything that we cannot see due to its location in the game.

Objects and environment

The processor needs to calculate the distance to objects, their beginning and end, generate all the data and transfer it to the video card for display. A separate task is the calculation of contacting objects; this requires additional resources. Next, the video card gets to work with the built environment and finalizes small details. Due to weak CPU power in games, sometimes objects do not fully load, the road disappears, buildings remain boxes. In some cases, the game simply stops for a while to generate the environment.

Then everything depends only on the engine. In some games, the deformation of cars and the simulation of wind, fur and grass are performed by video cards. This significantly reduces the load on the processor. Sometimes it happens that these actions need to be performed by the processor, which is why frame drops and freezes occur. If particles: sparks, flashes, water sparkles are executed by the CPU, then most likely they have a certain algorithm. The fragments from a broken window always fall the same way, and so on.

What settings in games affect the processor?

Let's look at a few modern games and find out which graphics settings affect the processor. Four games developed on our own engines will participate in the tests, this will help make the test more objective. To make the tests as objective as possible, we used a video card that these games did not load 100%, this will make the tests more objective. We will measure changes in the same scenes using an overlay from the FPS Monitor program.

GTA 5

Changing the number of particles, texture quality and lowering the resolution do not improve CPU performance in any way. The increase in frames is visible only after reducing the population and rendering distance to a minimum. There is no need to change all settings to a minimum, since in GTA 5 almost all processes are taken over by the video card.

By reducing the population, we have reduced the number of objects with complex logic, and the draw distance has reduced the total number of displayed objects that we see in the game. That is, now buildings do not take on the appearance of boxes when we are away from them, the buildings are simply absent.

Watch Dogs 2

Post-processing effects such as depth of field, blur and cross-section did not increase the number of frames per second. However, we got a slight increase after lowering the shadow and particle settings.

In addition, a slight improvement in the smoothness of the picture was obtained after lowering the relief and geometry to minimum values. Reducing the screen resolution did not give any positive results. If you reduce all the values ​​to the minimum, you will get exactly the same effect as lowering the shadow and particle settings, so there is not much point in doing so.

Crysis 3

Crysis 3 is still one of the most demanding computer games. It was developed on its own CryEngine 3 engine, so it is worth taking into account that the settings that affected the smoothness of the image may not give the same result in other games.

Minimum settings for objects and particles significantly increased the minimum FPS, but drawdowns were still present. In addition, performance in the game was affected after reducing the quality of shadows and water. Reducing all graphics parameters to the minimum helped to get rid of sudden drawdowns, but this had virtually no effect on the smoothness of the picture.

For ease of understanding, we can understand FPS as FPS output by a processor with an infinitely powerful video card and FPS output by a video card with an infinitely powerful processor. in all cases, FPS is objectively finite and limited by the weakened part.
further then-yes. microfreezes and wet freezes can come from the processor part. Macro friezes are already true, either the PSL Express controller cannot push the video card or from the memory subsystem, micro friezes are common due to the fact that there are few cores-threads or the game is optimized for few threads and the power of the cores is not enough. Naturally, problems can also arise from the video card, but the usual picture with a weak processor and a good card is that the game gradually loses FPS until it slows down.

For clarity, if we take GTA 5, which I had the pleasure of testing with Pek-Pek AMD fx6100 and Zhifors 690 (with the exception of video memory dependence) at 1600x1200, the processor can run the game in a year densely populated with machines up to 25fps and probably lower. however, if you go out of town you can actually get around 50-60 fps. Posons usually had a diametrically opposite picture, since outside the city there is graphon and grass, which creates a load on the video card and the pitch balance is shifted towards the GPU.

is fx 8300 enough? and does the RAM frequency affect games or not?
with 970 and 1080p resolution, such a combination will be quite balanced (even I would say tending to a deficit in GPU performance with the correct selection of components for the processor) in games starting from 15-16 years old if one strives to set the maximum settings. since the performance of 970 is usually 30fps
If you answer how RAM affects FPS - it affects 2 channels to a greater extent than the memory frequency in a single channel. For the default frequency of fx 8300, 2x 1333 memory will be enough. Then proceeding to overclocking that a separate topic with 2-channel memory may require 1600 or faster memory. maybe in the sense that after about 3.8-4 GHz AMD will start cranking with 1333 memory, giving out FPS less than it could and with increasing frequency the cuckoo coefficient will increase
I would call a normal solution to take this fuyx with a normal full-size motherboard and drive it up to 4.-4.4 GHz without a turbo with an increase in the NT multiplier. Such performance, in principle, will be enough for most modern assassin-type players up to 30 fps and will ensure the expansion of cards up to about 1080 or 1080 if we consider it with a margin.

With old processors, in turn, there can be such a curiosity that despite some performance in benchmarks equal to some processor of the new generation - it will be significantly slower and run games somewhere on the verge of being unplayable (and the situation may be the opposite when some 32 the thread processor will, let's say, suck in games of the pastgen era). so I wouldn’t make a reliable forecast of how some very old processor with a normal card will trample and at max speed I wouldn’t do it

The first quad-core processor was released in the fall of 2006. It was the Intel Core 2 Quad model, based on the Kentsfield core. At the time, popular games included bestsellers such as The Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion and Half-Life 2: Episode One. The “killer of all gaming computers” Crysis has not yet appeared. And the DirectX 9 API with shader model 3.0 was in use.

How to choose a processor for a gaming PC. We study the effect of processor dependence in practice

But it's the end of 2015. There are 6- and 8-core central processors on the market in the desktop segment, but 2- and 4-core models are still considered popular. Gamers admire the PC versions of GTA V and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, and there is no gaming video card in the wild that can produce a comfortable FPS level in 4K resolution at maximum graphics quality settings in Assassin’s Creed Unity. In addition, the Windows 10 operating system was released, which means that the era of DirectX 12 has officially arrived. As you can see, a lot of water has passed under the bridge in nine years. Therefore, the question of choosing a central processor for a gaming computer is more relevant than ever.

The essence of the problem

There is such a thing as the processor dependence effect. It can manifest itself in absolutely any computer game. If the performance of a video card is limited by the capabilities of the central chip, then the system is said to be processor-dependent. We must understand that there is no single scheme by which the strength of this effect can be determined. It all depends on the features of the particular application, as well as the selected graphics quality settings. However, in absolutely any game, the central processor is tasked with such tasks as organizing polygons, lighting and physics calculations, artificial intelligence modeling, and many other actions. Agree, there is plenty of work to do.

The most difficult thing is to choose a central processor for several graphics adapters at once

In processor-dependent games, the number of frames per second can depend on several parameters of the “stone”: architecture, clock speed, number of cores and threads, and cache size. The main goal of this material is to identify the main criteria that affect the performance of the graphics subsystem, as well as to form an understanding of which central processor is suitable for a particular discrete video card.

Frequency

How to identify processor dependence? The most effective way is empirically. Since the central processor has several parameters, let's look at them one by one. The first characteristic that most often pays close attention to is the clock frequency.

The clock speed of central processors has not increased for quite some time. At first (in the 80s and 90s), it was the increase in megahertz that led to a frantic increase in the overall level of productivity. Now the frequency of AMD and Intel central processors is frozen in the delta of 2.5-4 GHz. Everything below is too budget-friendly and not entirely suitable for a gaming computer; everything higher is already overclocking. This is how processor lines are formed. For example, there's the Intel Core i5-6400 running at 2.7 GHz ($182) and the Core i5-6500 running at 3.2 GHz ($192). These processors have absolutely all the same characteristics, except clock speed and price.

Overclocking has long become a “weapon” of marketers. For example, only a lazy motherboard manufacturer does not boast about the excellent overclocking potential of its products

On sale you can find chips with an unlocked multiplier. It allows you to overclock the processor yourself. At Intel, such “stones” have the letters “K” and “X” in their names. For example, Core i7-4770K and Core i7-5690X. Plus, there are separate models with an unlocked multiplier: Pentium G3258, Core i5-5675C and Core i7-5775C. AMD processors are labeled in a similar way. Thus, hybrid chips have the letter “K” in their names. There is a line of FX processors (AM3+ platform). All “stones” included in it have a free multiplier.

Modern AMD and Intel processors support automatic overclocking. In the first case it is called Turbo Core, in the second - Turbo Boost. The essence of its operation is simple: with proper cooling, the processor increases its clock frequency by several hundred megahertz during operation. For example, the Core i5-6400 operates at a speed of 2.7 GHz, but with active Turbo Boost technology this parameter can permanently increase to 3.3 GHz. That is, exactly at 600 MHz.

It is important to remember: the higher the clock frequency, the hotter the processor! So it is necessary to take care of high-quality cooling of the “stone”

I'll take the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X video card - the most powerful single-chip gaming solution of our time. And the Intel Core i5-6600K processor is a mainstream model, equipped with an unlocked multiplier. Then I'll launch Metro: Last Light - one of the most CPU-intensive games these days. The graphics quality settings in the application are selected in such a way that the number of frames per second each time depends on the performance of the processor, but not the video card. In the case of GeForce GTX TITAN X and Metro: Last Light - maximum graphics quality, but without anti-aliasing. Next, I will measure the average FPS level in the range from 2 GHz to 4.5 GHz in Full HD, WQHD and Ultra HD resolutions.

Processor dependency effect

The most noticeable effect of processor dependence, which is logical, manifests itself in light modes. So, in 1080p, as the frequency increases, the average FPS steadily increases. The indicators turned out to be very impressive: when the operating speed of the Core i5-6600K increased from 2 GHz to 3 GHz, the number of frames per second in Full HD resolution increased from 70 FPS to 92 FPS, that is, by 22 frames per second. When the frequency increases from 3 GHz to 4 GHz, it increases by another 13 FPS. Thus, it turns out that the processor used, with the given graphics quality settings, was able to “pump up” the GeForce GTX TITAN X in Full HD only from 4 GHz - it was from this point that the number of frames per second stopped growing as the CPU frequency increased.

As the resolution increases, the processor dependence effect becomes less noticeable. Namely, the number of frames stops growing starting at 3.7 GHz. Finally, in Ultra HD resolution we almost immediately ran into the potential of the graphics adapter.

There are many discrete video cards. It is customary on the market to catalog these devices into three segments: Low-end, Middle-end and High-end. Captain Obvious suggests that different processors with different frequencies are suitable for graphics adapters of different performance.

Dependence of gaming performance on CPU frequency

Now let's take the GeForce GTX 950 video card - a representative of the upper Low-end segment (or lower Middle-end), that is, the absolute opposite of the GeForce GTX TITAN X. The device belongs to the entry level, however, it is capable of providing a decent level of performance in modern games in Full HD resolution. As can be seen from the graphs below, a processor operating at a frequency of 3 GHz “pumps up” the GeForce GTX 950 in both Full HD and WQHD. The difference with the GeForce GTX TITAN X is visible to the naked eye.

It is important to understand that the less load falls on the “shoulders” of the video card, the higher the frequency of the central processor should be. It is irrational to purchase, for example, a GeForce GTX TITAN X level adapter and use it in games at a resolution of 1600x900 pixels.

Low-end video cards (GeForce GTX 950, Radeon R7 370) will need a central processor operating at a frequency of 3 GHz or more. Middle-end segment adapters (Radeon R9 280X, GeForce GTX 770) - 3.4-3.6 GHz. Flagship high-end video cards (Radeon R9 Fury, GeForce GTX 980 Ti) - 3.7-4 GHz. Productive SLI/CrossFire connections - 4-4.5 GHz

Architecture

In reviews dedicated to the release of this or that generation of central processors, the authors continually state that the difference in performance in x86 computing from year to year is a meager 5-10%. This is a kind of tradition. Neither AMD nor Intel have seen serious progress for a long time, and phrases like “ I continue to sit on my Sandy Bridge, I'll wait until next year"become winged. As I already said, in games the processor also has to process a large amount of data. In this case, a reasonable question arises: to what extent is the effect of processor dependence observed in systems with different architectures?

For both AMD and Intel chips, you can identify a list of modern architectures that are still popular. They are relevant, on a global scale the difference in performance between them is not so big.

Let's take a couple of chips - Core i7-4790K and Core i7-6700K - and make them work at the same frequency. Processors based on the Haswell architecture, as is known, appeared in the summer of 2013, and Skylake solutions in the summer of 2015. That is, exactly two years have passed since the update of the line of “tak” processors (that’s what Intel calls crystals based on completely different architectures).

Impact of architecture on gaming performance

As you can see, there is no difference between the Core i7-4790K and Core i7-6700K, operating at the same frequencies. Skylake is ahead of Haswell in only three games out of ten: Far Cry 4 (by 12%), GTA V (by 6%) and Metro: Last Light (by 6%) - that is, in all the same processor-dependent applications. However, 6% is mere nonsense.

Comparison of processor architectures in games (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980)

A few platitudes: it is obvious that it is better to assemble a gaming computer on the basis of the most modern platform. After all, not only the performance of the chips themselves is important, but also the functionality of the platform as a whole.

Modern architectures, with few exceptions, have the same performance in computer games. Owners of processors from the Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge and Haswell families can feel quite calm. The situation is similar with AMD: all kinds of modular architecture variations (Bulldozer, Piledriver, Steamroller) in games have approximately the same level of performance

Cores and threads

The third and perhaps determining factor limiting the performance of a video card in games is the number of CPU cores. It’s no wonder that more and more games require a quad-core CPU to be installed in their minimum system requirements. Vivid examples include such modern hits as GTA V, Far Cry 4, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, and Assassin’s Creed Unity.

As I said at the very beginning, the first quad-core processor appeared nine years ago. Now there are 6- and 8-core solutions on sale, but 2- and 4-core models are still in use. I will give a table of markings for some popular AMD and Intel lines, dividing them depending on the number of “heads”.

AMD APUs (A4, A6, A8 and A10) are sometimes called 8-, 10-, and even 12-core. It’s just that the company’s marketers also add elements of the built-in graphics module to the computing units. Indeed, there are applications that can use heterogeneous computing (when x86 cores and embedded video process the same information together), but such a scheme is not used in computer games. The computational part performs its task, the graphic part does its own.

Some Intel processors (Core i3 and Core i7) have a certain number of cores, but twice the number of threads. The technology responsible for this is Hyper-Threading, which first found its application in Pentium 4 chips. Threads and cores are slightly different things, but we’ll talk about this a little later. In 2016, AMD will release processors based on the Zen architecture. For the first time, the Reds' chips will have technology similar to Hyper-Threading.

In fact, the Core 2 Quad based on the Kentsfield core is not a full-fledged quad-core. It is based on two Conroe crystals housed in one package for LGA775

Let's do a little experiment. I took 10 popular games. I agree that such an insignificant number of applications is not enough to state with 100% certainty that the effect of processor dependence has been fully studied. However, the list includes only hits that clearly demonstrate trends in modern game development. Graphics quality settings were selected in such a way that the final results did not limit the capabilities of the video card. For GeForce GTX TITAN X this is maximum quality (without anti-aliasing) and Full HD resolution. The choice of such an adapter is obvious. If the processor can “pump up” the GeForce GTX TITAN X, then it can cope with any other video card. The stand used the top-end Core i7-5960X for the LGA2011-v3 platform. Testing was carried out in four modes: with activation of only 2 cores, only 4 cores, only 6 cores and 8 cores. Hyper-Threading multithreading technology was not used. Plus, testing was carried out at two frequencies: at nominal 3.3 GHz and overclocked to 4.3 GHz.

CPU dependency in GTA V

GTA V is one of the few modern games that use all eight cores of the processor. Therefore, it can be called the most processor-dependent. On the other hand, the difference between six and eight cores was not so impressive. Judging by the results, the two cores are very far behind other operating modes. The game slows down, a large number of textures are simply not drawn. A stand with four cores demonstrates noticeably better results. It lags behind the six-core one by only 6.9%, and by 11% behind the eight-core one. Whether in this case the game is worth the candle is up to you to decide. However, GTA V clearly demonstrates how the number of processor cores affects the performance of a video card in games.

The vast majority of games behave in a similar way. In seven out of ten applications, the system with two cores turned out to be processor-dependent. That is, the FPS level was limited precisely by the central processor. At the same time, in three out of ten games, the six-core stand demonstrated an advantage over the quad-core one. True, the difference cannot be called significant. The game Far Cry 4 turned out to be the most radical - it stupidly did not start on a system with two cores.

The gain from using six and eight cores in most cases turned out to be either too small or not there at all.

CPU dependency in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

Three games that are loyal to the dual-core system were The Witcher 3, Assassin's Creed Unity and Tomb Raider. All modes showed identical results.

For those who are interested, I will provide a table with complete test results.

Multi-core gaming performance

Four cores is the optimal number for today. At the same time, it is obvious that gaming computers with a dual-core processor are not worth building. In 2015, it is precisely this “stone” that is the bottleneck in the system

We've sorted out the nuclei. The test results clearly show that in most cases, four processor heads are better than two. At the same time, some Intel models (Core i3 and Core i7) can boast support for Hyper-Threading technology. Without going into details, I will note that such chips have a certain number of physical cores and double the number of virtual ones. In ordinary applications, Hyper-Threading certainly makes sense. But how does this technology fare in games? This issue is especially relevant for the line of Core i3 processors - nominally dual-core solutions.

To determine the effectiveness of multi-threading in games, I assembled two test benches: with a Core i3-4130 and a Core i7-6700K. In both cases, the GeForce GTX TITAN X video card was used.

Hyper-Threading efficiency of Core i3

In almost all games, Hyper-Threading technology affected the performance of the graphics subsystem. Naturally, for the better. In some cases the difference was gigantic. For example, in The Witcher, the number of frames per second increased by 36.4%. True, in this game without Hyper-Threading, disgusting freezes were observed every now and then. I note that no such problems were noticed with the Core i7-5960X.

As for the quad-core Core i7 processor with Hyper-Threading, support for these technologies made itself felt only in GTA V and Metro: Last Light. That is, in only two games out of ten. The minimum FPS has also increased noticeably. Overall, the Core i7-6700K with Hyper-Threading was 6.6% faster in GTA V and 9.7% faster in Metro: Last Light.

Hyper-Threading in Core i3 really drags, especially if the system requirements indicate a quad-core processor model. But in the case of Core i7, the performance increase in games is not so significant

Cache

We've sorted out the basic parameters of the central processor. Each processor has a certain amount of cache. Today, modern integrated solutions use up to four levels of this type of memory. The cache of the first and second levels, as a rule, is determined by the architectural features of the chip. The L3 cache may vary from model to model. I will provide a small table for your reference.

So, more productive Core i7 processors have 8 MB of third-level cache, while less fast Core i5 processors have 6 MB. Will this 2 MB affect gaming performance?

Broadwell and some Haswell family processors use 128 MB of eDRAM memory (Level 4 cache). In some games it can seriously speed up the system.

It's very easy to check. To do this, you need to take two processors from the Core i5 and Core i7 lines, set them to the same frequency and disable Hyper-Threading technology. As a result, in the nine games tested, only F1 2015 showed a noticeable difference of 7.4%. The rest of the 3D entertainment did not respond in any way to the 2-MB deficit in the third level cache of the Core i5-6600K.

The impact of L3 cache on gaming performance

The difference in L3 cache between Core i5 and Core i7 processors in most cases does not affect system performance in modern games

AMD or Intel?

All tests discussed above were carried out using Intel processors. However, this does not mean at all that we do not consider AMD solutions as the basis for a gaming computer. Below are the test results using the FX-6350 chip used in AMD's most powerful AM3+ platform, using four and six cores. Unfortunately, I did not have an 8-core AMD “stone” at my disposal.

Comparison of AMD and Intel in GTA V

GTA V has already proven itself to be the most CPU-intensive game. Using four cores in an AMD system, the average FPS level was higher than, for example, a Core i3 (without Hyper-Threading). In addition, in the game itself, the image was rendered smoothly, without stuttering. But in all other cases, Intel cores turned out to be consistently faster. The difference between processors is significant.

Below is a table with full testing of the AMD FX processor.

Processor dependency on an AMD system

There is no noticeable difference between AMD and Intel in only two games: The Witcher and Assassin’s Creed Unity. In principle, the results lend themselves perfectly to logic. They reflect the real balance of power in the central processor market. Intel cores are noticeably more powerful. Including in games. AMD's four cores compete with Intel's two. At the same time, the average FPS is often higher for the latter. Six AMD cores compete with the four threads of the Core i3. Logically, the eight “heads” of the FX-8000/9000 should challenge the Core i5. Yes, AMD cores are absolutely deservedly called “half-cores”. These are the features of modular architecture.

The result is banal. Intel solutions are better for gaming. However, among budget solutions (Athlon X4, FX-4000, A8, Pentium, Celeron), AMD products are preferable. Testing has shown that the slower four cores perform better in CPU-dependent games than the faster two Intel cores. In the mid and high price ranges (Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, A10, FX-6000, FX-8000, FX-9000) Intel solutions are already preferable

DirectX 12

As was already said at the very beginning of the article, with the release of Windows 10, DirectX 12 became available to computer game developers. You can find a detailed overview of this API. The DirectX 12 architecture finally determined the direction of development of modern game development: developers began to need low-level software interfaces. The main task of the new API is to rationally use the hardware capabilities of the system. This includes the use of all processor threads, general-purpose calculations on the GPU, and direct access to graphics adapter resources.

Windows 10 has just arrived. However, there are already applications in nature that support DirectX 12. For example, Futuremark has integrated the Overhead subtest into the benchmark. This preset is able to determine the performance of a computer system using not only the DirectX 12 API, but also AMD Mantle. The principle behind the Overhead API is simple. DirectX 11 imposes limits on the number of processor rendering commands. DirectX 12 and Mantle solve this problem by allowing more rendering commands to be called. Thus, during the test, an increasing number of objects are displayed. Until the graphics adapter stops handling them and FPS drops below 30 frames. For testing, I used a bench with a Core i7-5960X processor and a Radeon R9 NANO video card. The results turned out to be very interesting.

Noteworthy is the fact that in patterns using DirectX 11, changing the number of CPU cores has virtually no effect on the overall result. But with the use of DirectX 12 and Mantle, the picture changes dramatically. Firstly, the difference between DirectX 11 and low-level APIs turns out to be simply cosmic (by an order of magnitude). Secondly, the number of “heads” of the central processor significantly affects the final result. This is especially noticeable when moving from two cores to four and from four to six. In the first case, the difference reaches almost twofold. At the same time, there are no special differences between six and eight cores and sixteen threads.

As you can see, the potential of DirectX 12 and Mantle (in the 3DMark benchmark) is simply enormous. However, we should not forget that we are dealing with synthetics; they do not play with them. In reality, it makes sense to evaluate the profit from using the latest low-level APIs only in real computer entertainment.

The first computer games supporting DirectX 12 are already looming on the horizon. These are Ashes of the Singularity and Fable Legends. They are in active beta testing. Recently colleagues from Anandtech