Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Graphics Intel Games Hardware

CPUs Do Affect Gaming Performance, After All 220

Posted by timothy
from the that's-just-what-jesus-said dept.
crookedvulture writes "For years, PC hardware sites have maintained that CPUs have little impact on gaming performance; all you need is a decent graphics card. That position is largely supported by FPS averages, but the FPS metric doesn't tell the whole story. Examining individual frame latencies better exposes the brief moments of stuttering that can disrupt otherwise smooth gameplay. Those methods have now been used to quantify the gaming performance of 18 CPUs spanning three generations. The results illustrate a clear advantage for Intel, whose CPUs enjoy lower frame latencies than comparable offerings from AMD. While the newer Intel processors perform better than their predecessors, the opposite tends to be true for the latest AMD chips. Turns out AMD's Phenom II X4 980, which is over a year old, offers lower frame latencies than the most recent FX processors."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CPUs Do Affect Gaming Performance, After All

Comments Filter:
  • by hammeraxe (1635169) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @05:57PM (#41102227)

    Try cranking up the difficulty of an RTS on a not-so-good computer and you'll immediately notice how things slow down

  • FTFY (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gman003 (1693318) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @06:13PM (#41102443)

    For years, stupid PC hardware sites have maintained that CPUs have little impact on gaming performance; all you need is a decent graphics card. That position is largely supported by FPS averages, as most GPU tests are run using the most powerful CPU to prevent the CPU from being the limiting factor, but the FPS metric doesn't tell the whole story. Examining individual frame latencies better exposes the brief moments of stuttering that can disrupt otherwise smooth gameplay. Those methods have now been used to quantify the gaming performance of 18 CPUs spanning three generations by some site that really has nothing better to do than to restate the obvious for morons. [ed: removed fanboy-baiting statements from summary]

  • by dreamchaser (49529) on Friday August 24, 2012 @06:03AM (#41106941) Homepage Journal

    This also shows what many of us have been saying which is Bulldozer is AMD's Netburst. I've stuck with the Phenoms because you get great bang for the buck and because it was obvious the "half core' design of BD was crap, now we have it in B&W, the much older Phenom spanking the latest AMD chips which cost on average 35-45% more. Lets just hope that recent hire of the former Apple chip designer to AMD can right the ship, because otherwise when I can't score X4s and X6s anymore i'll have no choice but to go Intel.

    You say that like you'll be forced to change your religion or political party. It's a CPU. It's a tool. Use what works best for your use case scenario. Why the fanboi mentality?

"The pyramid is opening!" "Which one?" "The one with the ever-widening hole in it!" -- The Firesign Theatre

Working...