F5F Stay Refreshed Software PC Gaming 8 fast cores should comfortably handle current and upcoming games over the next couple of years.

8 fast cores should comfortably handle current and upcoming games over the next couple of years.

8 fast cores should comfortably handle current and upcoming games over the next couple of years.

N
NaiROolF
Senior Member
685
11-27-2016, 02:53 AM
#1
Will having eight fast CPU cores without SMT/HT provide a solid experience for current and upcoming games? The opinions vary, but many believe six cores are sufficient for high-end gaming, while eight might be excessive unless you’re not streaming or juggling heavy tasks. I personally prefer real cores over logical ones, and HT/SMT can sometimes cause issues with multi-threaded programs. My setup uses a 12,700K processor at 5GHz with all cores active and HT disabled—this works well for Windows 10, though I’m unsure if it fully manages top-tier tasks. If you’re planning to play high-resolution games at 1440p or 240Hz with G-Sync, keeping your graphics card updated is important. I own an overpowered monitor to handle older titles and reduce VSync needs. While most of my games don’t demand 240 FPS, I’m open to upgrading for future titles. I’d appreciate if Intel could offer a CPU with more than ten P cores and better IPC in newer architectures. AMD has shown progress, but past experiences suggest stability matters more than raw numbers. Overall, eight cores seem promising for the near term, especially with good software optimization, but long-term success will depend on how games evolve in parallelism. Your perspective is valuable—hope this balance delivers a great experience!
N
NaiROolF
11-27-2016, 02:53 AM #1

Will having eight fast CPU cores without SMT/HT provide a solid experience for current and upcoming games? The opinions vary, but many believe six cores are sufficient for high-end gaming, while eight might be excessive unless you’re not streaming or juggling heavy tasks. I personally prefer real cores over logical ones, and HT/SMT can sometimes cause issues with multi-threaded programs. My setup uses a 12,700K processor at 5GHz with all cores active and HT disabled—this works well for Windows 10, though I’m unsure if it fully manages top-tier tasks. If you’re planning to play high-resolution games at 1440p or 240Hz with G-Sync, keeping your graphics card updated is important. I own an overpowered monitor to handle older titles and reduce VSync needs. While most of my games don’t demand 240 FPS, I’m open to upgrading for future titles. I’d appreciate if Intel could offer a CPU with more than ten P cores and better IPC in newer architectures. AMD has shown progress, but past experiences suggest stability matters more than raw numbers. Overall, eight cores seem promising for the near term, especially with good software optimization, but long-term success will depend on how games evolve in parallelism. Your perspective is valuable—hope this balance delivers a great experience!

D
Desty_3000
Member
53
12-01-2016, 08:05 PM
#2
No one can predict the future accurately. Therefore, focusing on current performance seems less useful. It's important to note that we're approaching consoles with over eight cores, making it increasingly probable that games will start using them. You've probably encountered various opinions, since each game has unique requirements. Ultimately, the safest approach is to concentrate solely on the games you play, which will guide your decision. As game engines advance, so will the expectations for hardware capabilities.
D
Desty_3000
12-01-2016, 08:05 PM #2

No one can predict the future accurately. Therefore, focusing on current performance seems less useful. It's important to note that we're approaching consoles with over eight cores, making it increasingly probable that games will start using them. You've probably encountered various opinions, since each game has unique requirements. Ultimately, the safest approach is to concentrate solely on the games you play, which will guide your decision. As game engines advance, so will the expectations for hardware capabilities.

A
abqefckt
Junior Member
16
12-02-2016, 12:24 AM
#3
I haven't paid much attention to the newest AMD/Intel CPU developments, but what are E-Cores? Regarding your question here, yes, in the near future 8 fast Cores should be sufficient. Keep in mind that Quad Cores are much more widespread. A bit behind them are Six Cores. Modern game consoles with 8 cores tend to run at lower performance levels. PCs, on the other hand, utilize higher-performance configurations... There was a lot of confusion after Microsoft and Sony announced 8-core SoCs, with marketers suggesting future PC gamers will need eight cores to handle them.
A
abqefckt
12-02-2016, 12:24 AM #3

I haven't paid much attention to the newest AMD/Intel CPU developments, but what are E-Cores? Regarding your question here, yes, in the near future 8 fast Cores should be sufficient. Keep in mind that Quad Cores are much more widespread. A bit behind them are Six Cores. Modern game consoles with 8 cores tend to run at lower performance levels. PCs, on the other hand, utilize higher-performance configurations... There was a lot of confusion after Microsoft and Sony announced 8-core SoCs, with marketers suggesting future PC gamers will need eight cores to handle them.

1
1Duduzim
Member
164
12-02-2016, 01:58 AM
#4
Microsoft plans to address the e cores via a Windows update for Windows 10 or possibly Windows 11. I see in Windows 10 with e cores enabled, the system consistently puts all eight P cores into park mode, as shown by Task Manager when you hover over a core—CPU0 through CPU7 remain locked. This behavior appears intentional rather than an oversight, especially since it's version 21H2.
1
1Duduzim
12-02-2016, 01:58 AM #4

Microsoft plans to address the e cores via a Windows update for Windows 10 or possibly Windows 11. I see in Windows 10 with e cores enabled, the system consistently puts all eight P cores into park mode, as shown by Task Manager when you hover over a core—CPU0 through CPU7 remain locked. This behavior appears intentional rather than an oversight, especially since it's version 21H2.