Conroe Reviews Released

[gaara]

Aside from that, I think its worthy to note that games are becoming more CPU dependant, and I don't mean any of the bottlenecking rubbish.

Games are always becoming "more" CPU dependant if you want to call it that because they're constantly becoming more powerful, but that is not to say microprocessors are not. In the next few years there should be mainstream success of yet another dedicated specialized matrix microprocessor responsible for all environmental interactions and we still have yet to see a multithreaded game. AI will never come anywhere near the complexity of rendering considering rendering gets specilized whereas AI is simply X cannot attack Y but can attack Z. Just look at current GPU construction, you've got a number of vertex shaders, pixel pipelines and even if you're comparing raw memory bandwidth they're nowhere near each other. CPU is simply one executable pipeline with a small amount of ondie memory accessible that hasn't really been optimized for one specific operation

The benchmarks seem to disagree with you.

Again I think you're considering unneccesary factors. Games are not really time crucial executions, once you get over a fluid framerate (and all of your benchmarks imply that all processors are able to achieve these fluid framerates) it doesn't really matter to most people how fast it gets executed as there really is no difference between 50FPS and 200FPS and there's no way you could distinguish a difference without monitoring the framerate. Any other execution comes down to time crucial executions though, and they rely entirely on the CPU to boot. You wanna encode a file to MPEG4 so you can burn a DVD in as less time as possible. You wanna install an application in as less time as possible. You wanna start working with some heavy scientific equations and want them done as quickly as possible. This is where you CPU really starts getting used

Think about it for a minute, why aren't gaming machines equipped with dozens of parallel operating cores yet workstations working with CAD and such are? Games are not dependant on the CPU, and the benchmarks do agree with me whether you wanna ac knowledge it or not. I know deep down you don't give a crap whether you get 100FPS or 1000FPS regardless of what causes the discrepency

Why do you think people use superPI, and I know you are oh too fast to quote superPI times. People would rather get an execution done in an hour rather than an hour and half versus getting 200FPS and 250FPS

 

[Outofwords]

We're talking about games Gaara, and a videocard's bottleneck. I have no beef with any other sort of application.

Gaming machines only need the single commercial processors available. We could do with some stroner GPUs though.

How can the benchmarks agree with you when the CPUs increase performance. That's just nuts. You say that the GPU is independant and the CPU doesn't do much. And yet, there is clear proof that the CPU is quite a major part of the whole system.

You don't have to reply any more, this is pointless. Neither of us is going to convince the other. I think I'm right, you think you're right. But keep in mind that you're the only one that thinks you're right.

 

[BennyV04988]

But the faster the chip the longer it will last for gaming. above the fluid rate of 60 fps, NOT 50, is undectible yes, however it will provide for the extra umph in intense fire fights and future gaming. Extra clockspeed is always good and can be utilized easily.

 

[gaara]

You don't have to reply any more, this is pointless. Neither of us is going to convince the other. I think I'm right, you think you're right. But keep in mind that you're the only one that thinks you're right.

Nah

To delay the tranmission of data through a data path.

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/B/bottleneck.html

In computer science, some authors refer to the von Neumann bottleneck between processor and memory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottleneck
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_architecture#Von_Neumann_bottleneck

http://www.css.msu.edu/PC-Guide/PC-Guide1.cfm#ddr

I couldn't find anything about a GPU bottleneck, I've acknowledged that the GPU becomes the limitation but it isn't a bottleneck. Now you understand why I was asking for the bus that causes the slow down, and the fact that since there is no such bus, there is no such bottleneck present

above the fluid rate of 60 fps, NOT 50

oh no I'm not getting into this again. Anything over 30FPS is fluid either way you look at it. I know, I played COD2 in the 30s for most of the game.

 

[Outofwords]

Ah, now you're getting into something else. There are two definitions of a bottleneck; The conventional one, and the technical one. The conventional one simply states that a bottleneck is one component slower than all other components. The technical definition has an already-established, specific meaning, as in the von Neumann bottleneck.

In any case, I was saying that you're the only one that thinks you're right as far as the GPU bottleneck (or lack thereof) goes. Stated another way, most other people think that the GPU is a bottleneck for the reasons I've stated throughout this thread. Maybe Nubius is with you, I really don't know, nor does it matter.

 

[BennyV04988]

the human eye can see a frame for 1/200th of a second. (200fps) so fluid is just speculation. 60 is accepted value. 30 fps is chopppppy. ask any gamer. 30 bugs the crap outa me. Thats like ghosting..baaad ghosting

 

[gaara]

In any case, I was saying that you're the only one that thinks you're right as far as the GPU bottleneck (or lack thereof) goes.

No it's the other way around. You're just being stubborn at this point, I pull up the first few results I found in google and all of them agree with me, and none of them indicate that a GPU acts as a bottleneck because it doesn't fit the definition of a bottleneck. Again, if you can quote a bottleneck as involving the GPU in any case apart from your own opinion (and I've already said I get what you're saying, but as I literally just showed you what you're telling me is not an example of a bottleneck) I'll accept it. The only thing you've showed me is a bunch of random quotes that don't have sources

This isn't about you or I being right or wrong, I agree with everything you're saying, except for the fact that a GPU is not a bottleneck, it has a limit plain and simple

the human eye can see a frame for 1/200th of a second. (200fps) so fluid is just speculation. 60 is accepted value. 30 fps is chopppppy. ask any gamer. 30 bugs the crap outa me. Thats like ghosting..baaad ghosting

I told you it comes down to personal intrepretation, again quote for me the fact that the human eye can "refresh" itself every 1/200 of second, although it doesn't really matter. I see you're running an LCD so I'm telling you flat out it's IMPOSSIBLE for you to tell the difference between 60FPS and 200FPS considering LCDs usually only have a refresh rate of 75Hz therefore your monitor isn't even refreshing fast enough to allow 200FPS

And you're asking a gamer

 

[BennyV04988]

ah ha! 60 fps now eh? what happened to 30 PUNK?

 

[Spartan]

Some games run at 30fps constantly, such as Halo on the Xbox. Doesn't ever look choppy to me.

 

[gaara]

ah ha! 60 fps now eh? what happened to 30 PUNK?

because I was using an example of your situation, and since you don't seem to agree that 30FPS is fluid I'm obviously not going to use it as you'll just pick apart my example claiming that 30FPS is not fluid. Read: YOUR situation, not mine, I don't use an LCD

And again I have sources whereas you just have "ask any gamer".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate#Frame_rates_in_video_games

HD is 29.97FPS as well