Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 11 Mar 2008.
Yes of course crytek would say that, think.
marketing talk. translation: we need four physical cores because of the amount of threads we spawn.
any multithreaded game will benefit from an increased number of physical CPU cores: fact.
Source has been updated since HL2. wake up.
Oh, get real. Alan Wake is another one, they said it had to be DESIGNED, which is common sense. Anyway, I see the same people ehre contineu to be ignorant and try and twist facts. Why would they lie, it has nothing to do with crysis.
A game can't just distribute its assets automatically, it has to be designed to use all 4 cores properly.
what crytek said in their press releases is that a game needs to be properly designed to separate the calculations into threads in a way that is efficient not that it specifically had to be made for a specific # of cores
Newer games are supporting multicore processors, games such as Crysis are programmed in such a way that it may run an ai thread, a physics thread a gui thread ect. One for each core of your processor. Most current games that claim multithreaded support only actually support 2 threads so you will see no additional performance boost in the quad core over a dual core.
The above is from an article i just read.
it's not the game! it's the OS. the OS handles the distribution and scheduling of process threads! the game just tells the OS, "look, i have 12 threads, handle them for me, OK?", and away it goes. AS FAR AS THE GAME IS CONCERNED IT DOESN"T CARE HOW MANY CORES ARE RUNNING. IF IT SPAWNS A LOT OF THREADS IT WILL RUN FASTER. THAT IS IT.
a game has to be desinged to use all 4 cores for any performance benefit to be had. Fact.
READ, you idiot, it is the game, the OS WILL SEE THE 4 cores, but a game will see little no no impact in perfiormance unl;ess it is desined with 4 cores in mind. Research before posting and looking like an idiot.
you're using the inquirer as a source? what kind of fool.... wait, nevermind.......
christ on a stick, inquirer? are you serious? and not only an inquirer article, one that is from 2 years ago?
that's talking about going from single threaded, monolithic engines to multithreaded ones.
once that is done, there is no difference.
The inquirer, and Digg, want more? Crytek, anyone else? get real, a game has to be designed to take advantage of the extra cores, the same way Dual core did.
Year and a half old article not much better...
Read, sorry, but your wrong, and should research before looking like a fool.
and only crysis was designed with 4 cores since that article, so 1 game WOW.
No matter the age, that article PROVES a game nees to be designed with Quad cores in mind in order for any real performance benefit to be had.
now a vague digg reference? give us something respectable, not something pulled up quickly in google.
Tech moves so fast that might as well be written in sanskrit
Will the PS3 handle my 23" screen at native resolution?
Didn't think so...
**** it. leper, you're right. quad core makes no difference. i wasted my money. PC gaming is the best sort of gaming, and i am mistaken. I'm sorry.
The article proved my poit, games need to be designed to use all 4 cores. Where is your proof? U don't have any.
Separate names with a comma.