(10-31-2012, 02:25 PM)Shonumi Wrote: It depends on why FSX is demanding. If it's doing a task that similar or equivalent to Dolphin, your point would have more standing. But FSX isn't constantly recompiling code. Let me illustrate this with an example:Give it a try yourself then
It isn't very hard to make a small program that could max out all four of my cores. I just need to create 4 threads and tell each thread to do something (e.g. add 1 to some number) without stopping. I could even have it dynamically grab more memory (RAM). In this sense, since most of my resources would be used, it's technically more "demanding" than Dolphin. However, it'd be very short-sighted to claim that Dolphin or even FSX should run just fine since my computer can run this (rather asinine) little program. They're all doing completely different tasks. You need a program that's very similar in nature to Dolphin to start drawing these sorts of comparisons.
It still does not change the fact that saying an application requires a certain type of CPU to run properly is an ignorant and blinded comment. The CPU, doesn't, and will never work alone, it will always benefit from the rest of your hardware regardless of branding.
The real, and only downside is that people spend thousands of dollars to get the most mainstream and ''powerful' hardware for an application that does not require it at all. You can, and will get the same performance with a non intel chip IF -You know what you are doing-
Theres always an easy way, and a right way. Me? I'll just enjoy being able to run Dolphin smoothly with my crappy AMD chip.
Then again, that is just my opinion, and experience I've had with both brands, everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but it's close to useless if you haven't tried to get the best out of both ends before you speak.