Quad core is useless for games

[liqnit]

Coording to this hort article Quad core systems will not be a great game enahncers.
You can keep one core busy with the physics and collision detection, second core will have to wait for the score to move on with the Artificial intelligence while the third core could possible calculate the graphic data. In this best case scenario you have to realise that the core number two and three would always have to wait for the core number one to finish its job and pass the job to the cores two and three. In this concept there is absolutely no place for quad core as games are non parallel applications
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34916

[DragonMaster]

I see multi core as a replacement to faster cores. If they use 3 cores and make the use of the 2nd and 3rd core higher than the 2nd core of a dual core could handle, I don't see any problems.

[liqnit]

I see multi core as a replacement to faster cores. If they use 3 cores and make the use of the 2nd and 3rd core higher than the 2nd core of a dual core could handle, I don't see any problems.
the implemntetion of the Multicore concept should be in the OS itself nd the games.
if the OS will know how to handle the extended resource and to share it between application
then the user will have the best usage of such a CPU

[DragonMaster]

if the OS will know how to handle the extended resource and to share it between application
then the user will have the best usage of such a CPU
That's a better solution I didn't think about ;)
But then, Vista will be released in 2008 if they decide to do this :mrgreen:

[liqnit]

That's a better solution I didn't think about ;)
But then, Vista will be released in 2008 if they decide to do this :mrgreen:
2008 - you are really not a M$ worshipper

[DragonMaster]

Just remember how many times Vista's release date was pushed away for various things ;)

[werty316]

Not alot of games take advantage of a dualcore CPU but games in the future are suppose to like Crysis so a quadcore is so overkill.

[GIBSON]

Duno who wrote the article, but they do have a point. It's not going to work if one core has to wait for the other. In that respect is one very fast gfx core still a lot better. And well, I really can't see what the OS could change in that. It's not like an OS can controll time. Windows vista nor any other OS will ever be able to roll back in time so the information gets fast enough in and out the other cores.

[Kougar]

I see this article as nothing but an excuse by game developers to lazy to properly design a PC game. Go read up on Alan wake and why they designed the game with not 2, not 3, not even 4 but 5 seperate game threads: one for rendering, audio, streaming, physics and terrain tessellation. This game will not run on a single core, even if you have a FX57 CPU or not. They built the game right, even though it cost a little more and took much more effort. The results should show.

Alan Wake, Unreal Tournament 2007, and Crysis are going to need dual-cores, and all are supposed to show at least some improvement with a quad-core processor. The Inquirer is no better than it's tabloid namesake, they never report both sides of any issue. ;)

[DragonMaster]

The Inquirer is no better than it's tabloid namesake, they never report both sides of any issue.

Aren't most rumors turning fake coming from there?

[werty316]

A previous video of Alan Wake didn't show anything at all even though the reps said it was running on a quadcore. Companys can say whatever to give themselves the edge to say they did this and that; a key word used is "suppose to" which means its indefinite. Until actual games that take advantage of quadcore CPUs are out in writing, this is all speculation for now.

Dualcore CPUs have been out how long and how many games use the full potential of them? Not many.

[Kougar]

A previous video of Alan Wake didn't show anything at all even though the reps said it was running on a quadcore. Companys can say whatever to give themselves the edge to say they did this and that; a key word used is "suppose to" which means its indefinite. Until actual games that take advantage of quadcore CPUs are out in writing, this is all speculation for now.

Dualcore CPUs have been out how long and how many games use the full potential of them? Not many.

Indefinite? Supposed to?

Alan Wake uses 5 game threads, is this definitive enough for ya? http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060929-7868.html (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060929-7868.html) There is also http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2841&p=2 (http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2841&p=2). Having one entire core devoted to handling the physics of a tornado or two sounds like a good thing to me... ;)

[werty316]

The ability to run multiply threads using a quadcore CPU won't matter if you don't pair it with a fast GPU ;)

[PP Mguire]

Games havent been made to run on dual cores yet because the games we have now went into development before dual cores came into the public. Whats the use of making a game that requires 2 cores if you cant make any money off of this game until a year or 2 until the necesary hardware comes out? ITs like Crysis and UT2007. They started development when the dual cores came out not knowing that Intel was going to release a quad core this year so they made the game to what they knew was gonna be out when the game was gonna be released. Its like why make a game for DX10 when its not out and you wont know its gonna be out soon cause M$ might delay Vista 2 more years or something?

[liqnit]

Games havent been made to run on dual cores yet because the games we have now went into development before dual cores came into the public. Whats the use of making a game that requires 2 cores if you cant make any money off of this game until a year or 2 until the necesary hardware comes out? ITs like Crysis and UT2007. They started development when the dual cores came out not knowing that Intel was going to release a quad core this year so they made the game to what they knew was gonna be out when the game was gonna be released. Its like why make a game for DX10 when its not out and you wont know its gonna be out soon cause M$ might delay Vista 2 more years or something?
i totally agree
i think Multicore games will be spreding in 2008 and so (good games )
games that will take 2 yrs to develop

[PP Mguire]

Yea, i really wish that developers would take their time to make these games instead of just slap them out there like an egg. BF2 for example if you look at it is kinda a horrible game. All the patches and it still has ALOT of problems. BF2142 is pretty much the same thing except a more futureistic look to it. If EA took their time to make these games they would be so incredible when they first came out. Its sorta like the difference from Doom2 to Doom3. Such a difference cause they took their time.

Idk about yall but i remember how the ORIGINAL Halo was supposed to look like. It was supposed to come out on the Voodoo5 5500 but somebody smart up top their decided to wait and make it come out on the Xbox with ALOT better hardware. Look at it now, so popular among everybody. If only more game developers did that instead of slapping games out.