View Full Version : GPU vs. CPU
I'm begining to think that video cards are so much more important than processors. When I upgrade a video card, I always notice the difference in the games I'm playing, so softwares that I'm using. Not so much the other way around (Will a consumer ever really need 4 cores?). Do you guys agree that if someone wants quick noticeable difference in computer performance, it's better to upgrade the GPU? Also, are there anything in everyday computer usage that will ever need 4 cores (My parents' Pentium 4 is still doing the job just fine, rather nicely, in fact)?
Mr.Guvernment
05-13-08, 11:25 PM
depends, higher res / more aa and crap - video card is more important
play a fame at like 1280 x 1024 and your will see your CPU a limit... but with many games also being better coded for multiple cores, games are becoming better with faster CPU and faster GPU's, they go hand in hand....
Yes, many consumers do need and use 4 cores, easily..... Do many consumers need SLI or Xfire... no... but it is an option for those that do..
multiple cores are for those who do more then 1 thing at a time on their computer, dual cores even i would recommend, simply because of all the AV , spyware and other crap people need that slow systems down, the 2nd core will add all new speed to a computer.
i can use 4 cores and 4G of ram easily at home or work...
your parents likely dont do much on their computer... with more people and families creating how movies, high def content and other multimedia applications.. single core simply cant handle it, that is if you want to be able to use your computer while it works
joesaiditstrue
05-14-08, 12:34 AM
if you want an answer that's painted with a VERY broad brush: GPU right now is more times than not, more important in games than CPU
nVIDIA was spot-on when they said "CPU is dead".
For gamers, GPU is the chip one should upgrade. It's true CPU becomes a bottleneck at low resolutions - but who cares when FPS at such low resolutions is sky-high anyways. What good another 100FPS is?
joesaiditstrue
05-14-08, 03:22 AM
nVIDIA was spot-on when they said "CPU is dead".
For gamers, GPU is the chip one should upgrade. It's true CPU becomes a bottleneck at low resolutions - but who cares when FPS at such low resolutions is sky-high anyways. What good another 100FPS is?
except in RTS games :)
Or more like in one (1) single RTS.
:P
joesaiditstrue
05-14-08, 08:23 AM
Or more like in one (1) single RTS.
:P
wait, are you saying you can't get 8,000 units in a game of Company of Heroes!?
lol
my work machine is a quad core intel. I use it for indesign,photoshop, some other stuff etc. Between the size of the catalogs i work on etc. I can use all 4 gigs of ram and stress most the cores out pretty easy on a day where i am working on ten million things at once.
My dual core at home (am2) Is ok but honestly feels very sluggish. The intel at work feels insanely fast. Not sure if that's able to compare to each other. But almost makes me wish i would of bought a core 2 duo lol. Even my buddies machine seems faster and my cpu cost about 35, 40 bucks more.
necrokiller
05-14-08, 03:56 PM
nVIDIA was spot-on when they said "CPU is dead".
For gamers, GPU is the chip one should upgrade. It's true CPU becomes a bottleneck at low resolutions - but who cares when FPS at such low resolutions is sky-high anyways. What good another 100FPS is?
what about higher resolutions? Im beginning to think I need a new CPU or overclock this one (not a CPU OC'er so I wana stay away from that) if I need to make full use of my SLI at 1920x1080 and AA and all that eye candy.
So I would say its equally important to have a faster CPU if you have a fast GPU. Nothing alone will boost your performance.
thideras
05-14-08, 03:57 PM
what about higher resolutions? Im beginning to think I need a new CPU or overclock this one (not a CPU OC'er so I wana stay away from that) if I need to make full use of my SLI at 1920x1080 and AA and all that eye candy.
So I would say its equally important to have a faster CPU if you have a fast GPU. Nothing alone will boost your performance.If you are 2.33, I can pretty much guarantee that is holding you back. ;)
nVIDIA was spot-on when they said "CPU is dead".
For gamers, GPU is the chip one should upgrade. It's true CPU becomes a bottleneck at low resolutions - but who cares when FPS at such low resolutions is sky-high anyways. What good another 100FPS is?
That only means that the video card is the biggest damn bottleneck when playing games. When on high details the fact that it makes no difference if you have a 3ghz or 4ghz C2D means that the video card is the thing holding the system up.
If you are 2.33, I can pretty much guarantee that is holding you back. ;)
+1 I'm at 2.4 with my Q6600 until I get my watercooling system installed. I can assure you that your CPU is limiting your game performance. Matter of fact, if I overclock my GPU my benchmark scores actually drop because of the CPU bottleneck.
I'd say pick yourself up a decent air cooler and get that chip to over 3GHz
Mr.Guvernment
05-14-08, 06:08 PM
Nvidia said the CPU is dead because they are scared crapless, Intel is coming out with new gx card and their share in the mid range market dwarfs NVIDIA and ATI, also intel is working on a single chip cpu+gpu in one... so now think
you have AMD/ATi and Intel, vs lonely NVIDIA, who cant bulley their way around anymore in the GFX market... NVIDIA is takinga low stab at intel in hopes it will affect sales and people will run out and buy NVIDIA fastest cards!!! (as someone over on [H] put i very well)
NVIDIA has nothing to compete with CPU based rendering / rastering, they will be left in the dust unless they suddenly are able to design CPU's... so , maybe we will see NVIDIA buy out VIA?
necrokiller
05-14-08, 06:49 PM
Nvidia said the CPU is dead because they are scared crapless, Intel is coming out with new gx card and their share in the mid range market dwarfs NVIDIA and ATI, also intel is working on a single chip cpu+gpu in one... so now think
Really? DAMN! That would be sweet Intel comes out with a CPU+GPU chip. Also, Intel bought the Offset Engine, used for the game Project Offset, which looks epic! cant wait for it.
If you are 2.33, I can pretty much guarantee that is holding you back.
Yep, Im pretty sure of that too. I cant get my OCZ Vanquisher to fit properly on my motherboard. Its too big! So im stuck at the moment!
thideras
05-14-08, 06:49 PM
Yep, Im pretty sure of that too. I cant get my OCZ Vanquisher to fit properly on my motherboard. Its too big! So im stuck at the moment!*laughs evilly*
Dremel :)
what about higher resolutions? Im beginning to think I need a new CPU or overclock this one (not a CPU OC'er so I wana stay away from that) if I need to make full use of my SLI at 1920x1080 and AA and all that eye candy.The higher the resolution/level-of-detail the lower the impact of CPU speed, and vice-versa. Low res/LOD frames are much quicker to render in a GPU than high res ones. This is why Core 2 shines in low resolution/LOD gaming when compared to AMDs, but differences shrink to near-zero when resolution is bumped and GPU becomes the bottleneck. SLi will cause more display driver CPU-time overhead but it doesn't have a noticeable impact.
Nvidia said the CPU is dead because they are scared crapless, Intel is coming out with new gx card and their share in the mid range market dwarfs NVIDIA and ATI, also intel is working on a single chip cpu+gpu in one... so now thinkCPU-like-rasterizing (á la Larrabee) is not an immediate threat to nVIDIA, it's years away and likely won't beat conventional raster-engines when it comes out. AMD Fusion and low-end Nehalems with iGP are the ones nVIDIA is scared for as CGPU will completely kill nVIDIA's low/mid-end sales which are a considerable portion of their sales - about 20-30%.
you have AMD/ATi and Intel, vs lonely NVIDIA, who cant bulley their way around anymore in the GFX market... NVIDIA is takinga low stab at intel in hopes it will affect sales and people will run out and buy NVIDIA fastest cards!!! (as someone over on [H] put i very well)Very true, but what's wrong with it? They're absolutely right aren't they? One would be quite horribly uninformed if one buys a high-end CPU and thinks that's what matters for 3D gaming. nVIDIA is trying to convince people that it is not the CPU what makes you gaming PC fast, but it is actually the GPU. You can't argue with that. NVIDIA has nothing to compete with CPU based rendering / rastering, they will be left in the dust unless they suddenly are able to design CPU's... so , maybe we will see NVIDIA buy out VIA?nVIDIA will be in trouble in future. But imagine if nVIDIA bought AMD/ATi... Resource-wise it could happen, nVIDIA is big enough to buy AMD as AMD's current stock value is very, very low. There's just some problems:
1. they can't buy AMD before Intel seriously steps into GPU business as the merger wouldn't be approved by the officials that regulate corporate competition.
2. X86 license can be bought seperately and you can't "capture" a license by buying the company that owns it. They can't buy VIA either - but VIA might be interested in selling the license...
Or maybe not a nVIDIA-AMD buy-out, maybe a corporate fusion... That would be interesting...
So... what would nVIDIA do with the license? It woulnd't make much sense to build a whole new platform when you have 2 viable alternatives (more or less ;)):
1. K10 (with HyperTransport I/O, which is available to anyone interested)
2. Nehalem (with closed, proprietary QPI, good luck trying to get Intel to allow you get your hands on it)
The obvious choice would be nVIDIA would start building chips compatible with Opteron/Phenom platform and/or AMD Torrenza/HTX.
Mr.Guvernment
05-15-08, 02:14 PM
Very true, but what's wrong with it? They're absolutely right aren't they? One would be quite horribly uninformed if one buys a high-end CPU and thinks that's what matters for 3D gaming. nVIDIA is trying to convince people that it is not the CPU what makes you gaming PC fast, but it is actually the GPU. You can't argue with that.
Problem is they are leaving out alot of details.. like when is the CPU a bottle neck, and what games.. last time i checked most RTS games need a fast CPU.....
ALiEN2953
05-16-08, 09:15 PM
the only RTS out that is CPU limited is supreme commander...
Socket eh?
05-16-08, 10:36 PM
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-gpu-upgrade,1928.html
I'm surprised no one posted this article yet.
I guess no1 posted it because it's useless. THG doesn't seem to know how to benchmark GPUs.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.