Quad core maybe not a waste for gaming

[Pilotasso]

This is what I get while playing LOMAC:

LOCKON on core 3 and core 1 handling something heavy as well (GPU?), not only that the other 2 are also running something.

 

Wich raises the question, what if multi processing still benifits you even with single threaded apps by simply sending all other tasks to other cores?

 

The idea has been debated here numerous times but it seems it doesnt take vista to handle things like this (even if vista does it much better).

 

What are your experiences?

[Ven]

All cores indicate some sort of usage even running single threaded apps. But I think the question is... is it really more efficient when tasks are divided between cores on single threaded apps.

 

Try running LOMAC on all 4 cores and note the frame rate. Then try running it on single core and see what the difference is. I'm interested in that result.

[Pilotasso]

LOMAC wont run on 4 cores, just one, all we can do is to distribute other tasks to other cores to free up more resources for LOMAC. The thing is, that might include graphics and sound handling since the drivers might be calling different CPU's to manage them.

[Ven]

So doesn't that mean quad core is... for lack of better word... waste?

[Fjordmonkey]

So doesn't that mean quad core is... for lack of better word... waste?

 

Yes and no. Yes, in the case that a single-threaded application won't fully load-balance itself over multiple cores, but no, in the case that the overall system performance won't take such a massive hit if more CPU-hungry tasks (Lock On, System Processes, drivers and other services/applications etc) gets spread over multiple cores. In this regard you have a system that, in theory, will be able to somewhat load-balance itself without bottoming out available resources. Note that I say in theory, as overall system performance is due to more than just free CPU-cycles :)

 

But is a multi/Quad-core CPU worth the price that those CPU's currently fly at? That's open for debate. I'd say that if you want the maximum amount of overall system performace (not to be confused by maximum performance in one specific game/application) at any given time, then yes, the price of a multi/quad-core CPU is worth it. The tech behind multicore CPU's on the desktop is still somewhat young, though, which is probably why so few games/apps truly utilize both/all cores on a multicore CPU.

 

When it comes to system performance, there is a HUGE jump from my old P-IV to my E6300, even though each core run on a lower frequency than the old CPU. Going to Vista as well gained me a little more performance, but not a whole lot when compared to XP. But then again, every little bit counts.

[Kuky]

Hey Pilotasso... use CoreTemp (use v1.4 as I read latest v1.5 makes system crash for some people) as this is reading the temperature of the CPU die itself. Those PC Probe readings are generaly some 9-10°C lower then true values.

 

So, if PC Probe is reading around 41°C while playing LockOn on that quad core, that should be aboue 50°C real CPU temperature. Mind you though, that temperature will go much much higher if the CPU is 100% utilizes (unlike around 25% what you have on that screenshot).

 

If you want to see what real temperatures are present on the CPU under full load, use CoreTemp to read the temperature and use Orthos to test stress the CPU fully.

 

last night I was running my E6600 @ 3.2GHz and CoreTemp shows mid-40°C when I run SuperPI 32M calculation (this uses aproximately 50% of the dual-core same as LockOn because SuperPI is not multi core application) where as running Orthos which uses 100% of the CPU temperatures were at 57°C (there was one instance where it showed 58°C).

 

If we had LockOn run on multi-core, you'd really need to watch that cooling on quad cores. but then again I guess we would not need to overclock as runnig on 4 cores would make heck of a difference :D (well not fully 4 cores as system resources would be using some of the CPU as well)

[aceflier]

Quad core a waste? Try sp1 for FSX and tell me that its a waste. Can you say butter?

 

Love my qx6700 3.44ghz H20

 

And yes coretemp is the best app. although it reports my qx6700 as a qx6900 guess thats ok though :)

 

http://jlvisual.sasktelwebsite.net/fsx1.jpg