I agree about the G3258, eventhough i run it at 4,2Ghz because the extra mhz were prohibitive on my electricity bill. It sucks at the very latest of pc games which require a quadcore, but for dolphin and ps2 emulation it is excellent, comparing its low price of €60 to about €250. whilst it isn't any slower when overclocked properly. at 4,2Ghz its allready fast enough for even the most demanding games.
You dont own the processor according tot your profile. The g3258 isnt much when playing for example gtav. The new consoles are quadcores, you can expect more games coded specifically for them.
And im not living in the US of a, im in Europe.
I have the Intel, i like emulators, but if its performance youd want in future games then you will need a quadcore, be it Intel or amd. Preferably Intel.
GTAV will also struggle on a lot of AMD chips, too. Intel's chips have fast enough single threaded performance compared to similarly-priced AMD chips to overcome the overhead of context switching between two software threads on one hardware thread. However, you do have a point in that some games, such as Far Cry 4, outright won't work unless they detect a thread count of 4 or more, which is totally stupid, as there'll definitely be a fast enough dual core chip to run it at some point in the future, even if it's years away.
Quote:but if its performance youd want in future games then you will need a quadcore, be it Intel or amd
FYI , I have Quad Core A10 6790k @ 5.0GHz , it's not much faster than G3258 in PC games , not faster than my dual core 4 threads i5 4300M @ 3.2GHz when i encode video . Current AMD Quad Core is actually not a true quad core unlike their older Phenom II products . Current AMD Quad Core is based on Piledriver architecture which consists of so-called "modules" . Each of the two modules integrates 2 integer units, but only one FPU . It's not exactly the same as Intel Hyperthreading but the fact is : 8 cores FX 8350 is slower than 4 cores 8 threads i7 4790k in most tests
It's sad but current AMD Quad Core is only on par with an i3 Dual Core 4 threads . If you want a true Quad Core , get an i5 4460 or better CPU
bietrvat Wrote:You dont own the processor according tot your profile.
This is irrelevant since the data I posted is publicly available and not coming from me.
bietrvat Wrote:And im not living in the US of a, im in Europe.
This is irrelevant. You would have to be paying at least 75 times the rate here in the US just to break $5 a month with normal usage. No country in europe has energy costs anywhere close to that high.
So then I must ask the obvious questions:
1. How much extra wattage are you pulling at 4.6-4.8Ghz vs 4.2GHz?
2. What voltages are you using for each?
3. What is your kwh rate from your energy company?
4. How much is it costing you per month?
bietrvat Wrote:The new consoles are quadcores
Actually they're octacore.
bietrvat Wrote:you can expect more games coded specifically for them.
If by "coded specifically for them" you mean "more multithreaded than previous generations" then yes. Although those are not the same thing.
However this is irrelevant since as I said before the G3258 when overclocked outperforms AMD quad cores in multithreaded apps (even very well multithreaded games). So even if all future games have perfect load balancing across an infinite number of cores what I said in my post will still be just as accurate.
bietrvat Wrote:I have the Intel, i like emulators, but if its performance youd want in future games then you will need a quadcore, be it Intel or amd. Preferably Intel.
Well I disagree that an AMD quad core would be better than an overclocked Intel dual core even for future games for the reasons listed above.
bietrvat Wrote:The g3258 isnt much when playing for example gtav.
Ok now we're actually getting somewhere.
Benchmarks show that the G3258 beats AMD quad cores in GTA V:
http://www.techspot.com/review/1017-best-budget-gaming-cpu/page6.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9217/the-amd-a8-7650k-apu-review-also-new-testing-methodology/8
So what framerates are you getting? What settings and resolution are you using? What applications do you have running in the background? And how did you determine that it was a cpu bottleneck?
What other games do you think you're getting cpu bottlenecks in?
AnyOldName3 Wrote:However, you do have a point in that some games, such as Far Cry 4, outright won't work unless they detect a thread count of 4 or more
That is completely retarded. Is there any way to work around it?
(08-24-2015, 04:34 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]bietrvat Wrote:You dont own the processor according tot your profile.
This is irrelevant since the data I posted is publicly available and not coming from me.
bietrvat Wrote:And im not living in the US of a, im in Europe.
This is irrelevant. You would have to be paying at least 75 times the rate here in the US just to break $5 a month with normal usage. No country in europe has energy costs anywhere close to that high.
So then I must ask the obvious questions:
1. How much extra wattage are you pulling at 4.6-4.8Ghz vs 4.2GHz?
2. What voltages are you using for each?
3. What is your kwh rate from your energy company?
4. How much is it costing you per month?
bietrvat Wrote:The new consoles are quadcores
Actually they're octacore.
bietrvat Wrote:you can expect more games coded specifically for them.
If by "coded specifically for them" you mean "more multithreaded than previous generations" then yes. Although those are not the same thing.
However this is irrelevant since as I said before the G3258 when overclocked outperforms AMD quad cores in multithreaded apps (even very well multithreaded games). So even if all future games have perfect load balancing across an infinite number of cores what I said in my post will still be just as accurate.
bietrvat Wrote:I have the Intel, i like emulators, but if its performance youd want in future games then you will need a quadcore, be it Intel or amd. Preferably Intel.
Well I disagree that an AMD quad core would be better than an overclocked Intel dual core even for future games for the reasons listed above.
bietrvat Wrote:The g3258 isnt much when playing for example gtav.
Ok now we're actually getting somewhere.
Benchmarks show that the G3258 beats AMD quad cores in GTA V:
http://www.techspot.com/review/1017-best-budget-gaming-cpu/page6.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9217/the-amd-a8-7650k-apu-review-also-new-testing-methodology/8
So what framerates are you getting? What settings and resolution are you using? What applications do you have running in the background? And how did you determine that it was a cpu bottleneck?
What other games do you think you're getting cpu bottlenecks in?
AnyOldName3 Wrote:However, you do have a point in that some games, such as Far Cry 4, outright won't work unless they detect a thread count of 4 or more
That is completely retarded. Is there any way to work around it?
G3258 is not a good investment for gaming. Maybe emulation. I would rather get a FX-6300 for gaming. DA:I won't even run without stuttering on a G3258. I swear it runs at like 20FPS or lower. And Far Cry 4 won't even start without a workaround. And it's still stuttery.
True since its engine is extremely cpu heavy. However an AMD quad core will also chug. Even the FX 6300 bottlenecks it in some spots. For DA:I you really want a quad core Intel or 8 core AMD.
I've only seen core usage graphs for Far Cry 4 with more than 90% of the work on a single core, so once a workaround is applied, it may do better than some of the hardware that's officially supported on the G3258. Either way, though, we're comparing a £40 chip with something much more expensive if we're saying it should run everything perfectly.