AMD superiority secret?

[orion456]

Could it be as simple as a compiler switch?

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1895945,00.asp

[futura2001]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the short answer is that games are made to run on as many different systems as possible. If you compile with any SSE optimizations, you will exclude anyone running a legacy system that can't handle SSE from your potential customer base, which means less profits. Games are for profit, not performance.
This is completely aside from actually being able to compile the often kludgey code and end up with something that actually works, which is another matter altogether.

[microfire]

This thread should be in the AMD section.

[Shelnutt2]

I beleive AMD is better at gaming becasue of there shorter pipelines. As games are less predicable than number caculations. With intels longer pipeline games can't be prediced as well and branch off. Causing the thread to have to restart. Were AMD is shorter pipelines there is less of a chance because well its shorter.

I might be wrong.

[speed bump]

Actually you can get away with using these optimizations and still have it work fine on older hardware. Some people are just lazy though so, Intel gets hit heavily by there decision to look away from floating point accuracy and look more toward special instructions with the P4

[Sjaak]

Why AMD is faster in most?
- Well, as said, the shorter pipeline and integrated mem controller.

Why Intel is much faster in some?
- They have more cache and some game engines tend to lean on that a great deal.

[ronaldo]

Why people say Intel suck at games ? this is totaly stupid and ignorant, because P4 maybe is not fast like A64, but it can play all games fine. And what about Pentium M ? Dothan is a incredible cpu for games, so i dont see how someone can be so ignorant to write that Intel suck at games. (Intel is not a P4 only, Intel is P4, Pentium M, Xeon, Xscale itd...)

[spyware]

Don't fall into that Amd's are faster crap,I did now I've got a
x2 4200+ that cost double what my p4 3.2e cost and there is no difference AND thats upgrading from agp 6800gt to 7800gt pci woe is me :bang head :bang head :bang head :bang head :bang head :bang head and so on...oh and I lost 6 seconds on super pi.
I'm gonna go cry now.

[Sjaak]

Why people say Intel suck at games ? this is totaly stupid and ignorant, because P4 maybe is not fast like A64, but it can play all games fine. And what about Pentium M ? Dothan is a incredible cpu for games, so i dont see how someone can be so ignorant to write that Intel suck at games. (Intel is not a P4 only, Intel is P4, Pentium M, Xeon, Xscale itd...)

Well we are talking only Socket 775 / A64 here.

[futura2001]

Don't fall into that Amd's are faster crap,I did now I've got a
x2 4200+ that cost double what my p4 3.2e cost and there is no difference AND thats upgrading from agp 6800gt to 7800gt pci woe is me :bang head :bang head :bang head :bang head :bang head :bang head and so on...oh and I lost 6 seconds on super pi.
I'm gonna go cry now.

I wonder why?
Perhaps because you are using a dualcore to run singlethreaded apps? Each core on that X2 is in theory a (can you guess?) 3200+! So more realistically you went from a p4 3.2e to a 3200+ and thus you should not expect much of a performance gain if any at all.

[ronaldo]

the topic name is: Why Intel Sucks at PC Games?
Intel is a COMPANY.

[spyware]

A 3200+ is a s 754 with a 1600 h/t
and x2 is s 939 with 2000 h/t
I do see what you mean and windows and alot of other progs use both cores but it's still slow,maybe with new software it'll speed up but I still wish I stayed with intel.
even so it's called 4200+ it's surely not comparable to a
Intel at 4.2 ghz (they should be sued for using that rating system it's very mis-leading)
Or maybe they mixed up the numbers 4.2 =2.4??
and I am running it at 2.5 so 5 ghz intel hah

[bikinistud]

I look at this and think "why dont some of these games at least have some optimizations?" I mean SSE has been around for a long time (years) and anyone who doesn't have a cpu with SSE probably cant play new games anyway. Plus, if you were a game company wouldn't you want to optimize your games as much as possible (causing a performance hit for older hardware) so you can help out your fellow cpu/graphics card manufactures, pushing people to buy new and improved systems to play their games just that much faster. Isn't that the point of buying new hardware (other than the obvious frequency boost)?

All i'm saying is that regardless of whether it's faster on this or that chip, wouldn't it be worth the effort to optimize the game for the fastest hardware instead of the lowest common denomenator? (from a business perspective)

[ronaldo]

bikinistud: Do you realy think it will help in high resolutions ? NO it will not. (cpu is not bottleneck in high resolutions with AA)
In lower resolution we dont need optimizations anyway... (you wont see the diference betwen 150fps and 170fps...)

[orion456]

This thread should be in the AMD section.

This is an Intel thread, information about why Intel might not perform as well as possible.

[bikinistud]

Well at high resolutions no it will not affect anything but it's the middle resolutions with aa/af maxed out that i think you would see the most benefit from optimizations.

[CoreGamer]

I think pressler and conroe will change this a bit :P....


Btw...there are alot of flames bursting here

[3DFlyer]

Both CPU's will work just fine with games, and as long as you have a good late model system and it's tweaked it has plenty of potential to play the top titles.

There are some games out there that DO favor one, and even some that will *only* run on a speciffic CPU. They may be in it to make money, but some of these titles specialize to a niche market, and they are optimized for certain CPU's.

Not everybody has a dual core, yet the games or simulations are going forward with optimizing toward dual core. Some will still work on single cores, while others slow to a crawl. One case in point is LOMAC. It will run ona single core system, but it doesn't run worth a damn, and even with a dual core it's not much better, but it is optimized (if you can call it that) towards dual core, and if you play online, you would last long enough to get your a$$ shot off against a dual core 830...yes, that includes AMD.

In Falcon 4: Allied Force, the same thing is happening. They are moving toward the new Intel Dual Cores. The pople they sell to are mainly obscessed (like I am) with these simulators. They are not games. They are dynamic campaign engined, photrealistic, 3D cockpit, 6DOF, war simulations. It takes specialized HOTAS sticks, throttles, and IR Head tracking devices to fly them with any success. The people who fly them won't think twice about buying a system tailored for them. I already happen to have one because HT works fine right now with it. If you own a Dual Core Intel, or a HT CPU you will get max frame rates, and 90% of the users use Intel machines.

There is no advantage to shorter pipes. In fact, it is a hindrance. it is why Intel is now taking over the performace titles once again. It was a good idea while it lasted, but you can't have high clocks with short pipes. Intel is now in the position where they can shorten those pipes some (not too much like AMD did) and still retain their clocks. The performance gains of the higher clocks wilol show themselves definitively when Conroe comes out.

Onboard memory controllers are not what they are cracked up to be either. A celeron with no onboard controller whatsoever, can beat a clocked fx53 with a memory controller in Super Pi...a benchmark that relies heavily on memory. Those mem controllers are not the holy grail AMD would have people believe. In fact, Intel has deemed them as "not needed" and now considers any move in that direction a waste of time. They don't need "on die" to get the bandwidth...they already have it. They got it, by refining their chipsets, which is something AMD obviously cannot do, because they don't make a chipset.

They *should* make a complete package, but of course they *should* be doing alot of things they are not doing. Could've, should've, would've, don't mean a thing. It takes actual action and R&D to get somewhere. AMD is too busy wasting money in the courts trying to get stuff handed to them to do any real research with the exception of what their lawyers are feeding them, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Right now, they are on a suicide mission, and are hell bent on completing it. It looks like they are succeeding in that department.

Anybody wanna guess what's gonna happen 1Q 06 after Pressler/Cedar Mill has ben on the market a full quarter?

Hey CoreGamer, There's no flames here. I haven't even got out my fire suit. There's not even a spark and we sure haven't seen any gas yet either. I probably will get out the fire suit when Pressler and the Cedar Mills start showing up in benches here though. You never know though, with all the crying, the tears may put the fires out! hahaha

[Jame Gumb]

Are we talking about a few FPS here? If so, that aint gonna save you when I'm on your arse like white on rice in COD2 multiplay.

[AzureNightmareX]

Trashtalking is always so lovely, but arent we above such xbox live crap here? I mean come on, we're smarter than that cesspool of idiocy

[Cheator]

A 3200+ is a s 754 with a 1600 h/t
and x2 is s 939 with 2000 h/t
I do see what you mean and windows and alot of other progs use both cores but it's still slow,maybe with new software it'll speed up but I still wish I stayed with intel.
even so it's called 4200+ it's surely not comparable to a
Intel at 4.2 ghz (they should be sued for using that rating system it's very mis-leading)
Or maybe they mixed up the numbers 4.2 =2.4??
and I am running it at 2.5 so 5 ghz intel hah

My 3200+ is an s939. And I belive the 3200 is slower than a P4 at 4.2 ghz, but I am not sure. Why you'd buy a dual core chip and think it would be faster at everythign is beyond me though. for the same price you could probably have gotten some wicked San diego core and OCed it alot. Beat the pants off that ol p4

[spyware]

hehe wicked san diego?? you do know that a x2 is basically 2 san diego cores? anyway I got some ultra ram 1gig kit cl2223
Now its startin to perk up.gonna break 9000 on 3dmark 05.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/pics/newsss.jpg

[Cheator]

Fairly sure that Manchester core = 2 venice and Toledo core = San Diego. and the 3200+ is venice

[Mr.Guvernment]

RETAIL" (boxed) game, just like Kyle says, you'll never see 134fps in Doom3, you will always see a 60fps cap frame rate and the same goes for Quake 4 which uses Doom 3's engine.


Well that is wrong - Toss in Quake 2 - or Quake, they used in benchmark still and FPS jump upto like 500 - soo yes - you hack your Doom file to go above 60FPS - which i beleive you can and in 2 years with vid cards being incredible fast i can see Doom or any engine on it hitting above 100 + FPS easy.

[CoreGamer]

Hey CoreGamer, There's no flames here. I haven't even got out my fire suit. There's not even a spark and we sure haven't seen any gas yet either. I probably will get out the fire suit when Pressler and the Cedar Mills start showing up in benches here though. You never know though, with all the crying, the tears may put the fires out! hahaha
What I ment was this arguement was getting a little....tense. Whenever you put the words AMD and Intel together trying to compare them its like striking a match on a box, I have not yet seen an AMD vs Intel thread on this board that did not end up to be a flame fest...:(

[spyware]

I think I'm gonna go with....one of each.they're both good

[Mr.Guvernment]

Very good point, but will LCD be the main stream in 2 years, or will Plasma or the other forms of digital displays :D and do they have the same limitations ?

I read that they were working on a new form of CRT that was as flat as an LCD - cheaper to make and has all the good qualities of a high end CRT does.

[Tebore]

3DFlyer... Do you have any links to support your points? In most of your posts I've read around the forums, they seem to be opinion only with no real article or evidence to support them.

[speed bump]

Umm who cares about monitors this is about programming not monitors AMD memory bandwidth or an anything.

Its about taking advantage of special instructions which by the way whoever said legacy CPUs would be screwed if they started using special instructions is right becuase they are screwed right now by high end games. There is no way my dual P3 runs fear or BF2 or Quake 4. Athlons with bart cores have SSE2 instructions so just about anything good enough to run these games has the instruction set and if they didn't its just all line of code that is used if compatible and if not compatible is not used. So basically the biggest complaint is programmers are lazy and forget what anal instructors teach them or sometimes forget to teach them.

[noxqzs]

yeah! but? how about the native refresh rate on monitors? will they ever be above the 100 hertz? So far everyone is going crazy with LCD monitors which to me are not "that" good because of their 70 to 75 maximum refresh rate.



You are sort of comparing apples to oranges. An LCD monitor does not suffer from refresh problems, but rather response time. Each pixel is turned on and off as required. At any given moment, the pixel is always ON. You can argure that the color information is sent to an LCD 75 times per second(75Hz), but in the gap between signals, those pixels are still ON. A CRT, on the other hand needs the high refresh rate to keep the pixel illuminated. When that signal is removed, the pixel is not charged, and in other words OFF. This is what causes the flickering, much like turning a light bulb on/off real fast.