Dynamics lighting brought my GTX 1080 to its knee

[Hegedus Marton 6]

On ‎2017‎. ‎06‎. ‎15‎. at 8:36 AM, AnkH said:

Ehm, what?! I suggest you google a little bit for the differences between the Intel CPU's. Just as a hint, the so called "rendering" CPU you are talking about is an Intel i7 4960x, basically an Ivy Bridge 6 core CPU. And while it is optimized to be used for "rendering and computing", it is basically just an i7 3770K with two additional cores. And the i7 3770K you would consider as "gaming CPU", no? So what? Because of the two additional cores? Because it was expensive? BTW: the 4960X also has a free multi, meaning you can overclock it (like the 3770K) to 4.5GHz or beyond. The single core performance of both 3770K and 4960X are basically identical, no surprise, as both are based on the Ivy Bridge architecture. So, NO, it is not possible to say that the 4690X is "not for gaming", that's ridiculous.

So. For example: 6900k vs 6700k The 6900k better for rendering. 6700k better for gaming. I can't do anything, you just don't understand.

[Hegedus Marton 6]

On ‎2017‎. ‎06‎. ‎15‎. at 1:02 AM, ahsmatt7 said:

So what qualities does a good CPU for gaming have?

6700k or 7700k are the best.

[vp49p3 216]

On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 10:35 PM, garrett_frank said:

. . .  And I'm using a GTX 1080Ti that I've OC'ed the beejeesus out of.

I've got a 6700k that's overclocked to 4.7.  I've also overclocked my titan Pascal by 30% over the regular boost.  I've found that the biggest gain by far in frame rates has not been from overclocking my cpu, but from overclocking the gpu.  I couldn't  believe the performance increase.

[AnkH 2,263]

19 hours ago, Hegedus Marton said:

So. For example: 6900k vs 6700k The 6900k better for rendering. 6700k better for gaming. I can't do anything, you just don't understand.

Haha, seriously? It is me not understanding? You do not explain, you simply recite the basic description of those processors provided by Intel itself, without thinking a second. But enough OT, it is obvious that you do not know what you are writing about, so we can instantly stop this discussion now.

[ErichB 3,642]

21 hours ago, Hegedus Marton said:

So. For example: 6900k vs 6700k The 6900k better for rendering. 6700k better for gaming. I can't do anything, you just don't understand.

 

If your intention here is to find a solution, then you have to make people understand what your issue is.  What does that actually mean ?

[swiesma 625]

You guys are argueing about an issue that is not that simple. The "best gaming CPU" cannot be named. It always depends on the games you are playing. Some are for example making better use of additional cores than other games.

 

So if you have a game which has huge single core load like P3D you better go with a 4-core CPU with high frequency (which has changed a bit with v4 as now all others cores are also heavily loaded).

If you have games like BF1 which make use of more cores - then you gotta go with more cores. Simple.

 

 

 

Long story short: It always depends on the software you are using. There is no universal CPU which is best at "gaming" and the other is best at "applications".

The best CPU would be a 10 core + / 20 threads + CPU with the IPC and frequency of an 7700K ;-)

[AnkH 2,263]

Well, that is exactly why I explained the other guy that there are little differences between the 3770K he was calling a gaming CPU and the 4930K he was calling a rendering CPU. Both are based on the Ivy Bridge architecture so a 4930K running at the same clocks as a 3770K also have almost the same single core performance. Now, add the Quad-Channel and the higher cache of the 4930K, it might even be the BETTER gaming CPU than a 3770K at identical clocks. That's all I am saying. And of course it is related to P3D, as this is a P3D topic.

Funny enough that Intel will release 6 and 8 core CPUs in the next update that will be EXACTLY the same model as the 4 core pendant (just with more cores...), I wonder what this guy then will then tell us...