this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
708 points (97.3% liked)
Gaming
2739 readers
232 users here now
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
Our Rules:
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I find the video from LTT kinda hilarious with the 96 core threadripper. Breaking records in cinebench but Cities Skylines 2 still runs like shit (in a 1mio pop city).
Because chances are the 7800X3D will be faster due to the cache.
Real-world applications often can only be parallelized so and so much, before you start hitting diminishing returns for many reasons. A lot of it is about the actual technical design as much as it is the technical execution (you can't parallelize two operations if one depends on the result of the other).
Also cache optimization has been a huge trend in games programming in recent years
I’m not sure the 7800X3D would even run a mil pop city. They were using 64 of the 96 cores running Skylines 2.
Teeth don't render themselves, buddy.
That's the point I think. I haven't delved into the specifics too much but the 7800X3D favors big cache sizes (at all layers iirc) over cores/threads quantity. So, it should fare better with games that aren't very optimized for multi threading (ie, most games)