How well does AC use Threading ?

[Julian Rignall]

As the title, is it worth getting a cpu with lots of cores and threads and will AC use them ?
Looking to upgrade my ancient PC this year and the new AMD Ryzen chips look like a
good deal for cores & threads , the R7 1700 8 cores 16 threads 3.0 ghz 65W has me interested
and the price as well.

Video below looks like they may be worth considering?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QN2X16Aqwls
Edit:8 cores 16 Threads

[Talkie Toaster]

Those chips aren't focused at gamers, they're more for power users and content creators kinda thing. I use a 6c12t i7 though and it just doesn't care what I throw at it, Assetto Corsa will probably reach 55% usage under the worst conditions. Whilst I have no problems I suspect I might see some higher FPS with a quad core of higher individual per core performance in a few titles, so if it's gaming you're going to be doing I'd hold off and see what the mid range Ryzen chips are like.

[kazereal]

As I remember it, AC switched to threaded rendering (in PC version too) when they made the port for PS4 and XBone.

So AC does take use of parallel running (multiple cores). Also there's other things like operating system things that might need CPU time as well so having multiple cores should help having enough resources for games at all times (in other games too).

Simulations generally speaking are demanding on CPU (stuff like DCS, X-Plane) so those will use all the processing power you can get your hands on. Stuff like physics, AI, network and so on will still need to use CPU.

AC does use SIMD stuff like SSE also in the math code.

So consider your own budget and then decide.

[ivor_bign]

i have an 8 core AMD cpu and its ♥♥♥♥♥, it runs far too hot for the stock AMD cpu heat sink and friends with lesser intel 4 core cpus load into games faster than me and ive got a hybrid HDD when those same friends have normal old HDDs.

i run AC in VR and its my cpu thats bottlenecking, i get stuttering when there is lots of info for the cpu to handle yet my R9 390 is barely stretching its legs.

i have always gone for the cheaper option when building my PCs, ive learnt my lesson. intel and nvidia for me from now on. its a simple case of you get what you pay for.

cpus going cheap? cpus dont go cheap, chickens go cheap.

[ArkanHell]

I have 2 amd rigs with VR (phenom 1055t 6 cores@3200 16gb gtx660 Oculus Rift DK2 Win 7 x64, FX9590 8 cores@5ghz 32gb gtx780ti HTC Vive Win8.1 x64) in both AC uses all cores, run smooth as silk and no one of both cpus bottleneck AC ever ( tested with VR, single 144hz monitor in 2d mode and 3d vision mode and triple monitor 60hz surround). Still working as a charm when playing in vr and running a 24 slots dedicated server in the same rig i was playing.

From a sometime ago AC uses diferent threads for physics, AI and game core.

Never have a temp issue with Phenom with a crappy 20€ cooler from from my old amd dual core 4400, for the FX and his 225watts TDP i use liquid cooling system to tame it. Really happy with both rigs, the big one is used as DAW and heating system for my recording studio too :D.

Looking at early bencks of Ryzen cpus looks like can perform at same level of intel in IPC, outperform intels in multithread test, and not only the price of the cpu is reasonable, the whole platform is cheaper (top quality asus mobos about 200€ , cheapo ones from 80 to 150€)

And now the facts about the "intel 4 cores are better for gaming"

Fact 1: /lol at you intel fanboy
Fact 2:Unfortunately the bigger AAA titles are mostly focused in consoles, some of then show poor performance when ported to PC, Xbox one and PS4 its a low end pc hardware built by amd, both uses amd APUs with 8 cores at really low speeds, and some console games looks really great with the limited hardware. Why? because multithread use. Its simple ALL multiplatform games are programmed for 8 thread machines, you really want to buy a 4 thread overpriced intel when you have new ryzens here?
Fact 3: Even some old games uses 8 cores, the ones with less thread usage can perform better if you assign game to run in a specified core diferent than 0 and 1 cores ( when most windows processes run).
Fact 4: Since first GHZ athlons to the first x64 and x64 dual cores AMD outperforms intel with cheaper prices, and even in this times, lots of people ( most with poor technical knowledge) still buying intel because marketing and false facts over AMD. After this, Intel outperforms AMD in IPC and until now they have really good CPUs, but at insane prices caused by the lack of pressure from AMD. Now Intel and Nvidia are moving forward their new stuff launches and lowering prices, all caused because they know ( so much better than us) the new Ryzens and Vegas gonna hurt a lot.
Fact 5: Cats are cute.

BUT!!! (and is a biiig biiig biiig but) now is too soon my friend. Keep in mind buy a Ryzen, but not now, wait for more benchmarks when the cpus arrives in the market, if they perform as expected, intel must drop down their prices, and amd do the same. And from a long time AMD still using the same chipsets for some functions, now the whole platform was changed, this means you can find some bugs in the new mobos, nothing who cant be fixed with a bios update, but in every launch is better wait a little until all posible issues are fixed ( and prices lowered).

Maybe too you dont need a 1700x, with a 1600x (6 core/12 threads) or even a 1500x you can enjoy awesome cpu performance at really interesting prices, but they take a while to launch the "little brothers" in Ryzen family. and maybe you wanna wait too to put a vega 10 with your brand new Ryzen...

Im excited about the idea of a 1800x with a Vega 10 for an upgrade for my FX rig, but not enough to buy untested stuff, my advice is you do the same. :)

Regards.

[Ravnhood]

I also have a Phenom II X6 1055t and have zero issues.

[Durcaz]

I run a 4 core intel i5 from late 2013 and i can run at 144hz no problem, racing games are super easy to run unless you max out effects. You have nothing to worry about. Don't go overkill just because you can.

[Simon said EAT DUST PLAYER_1 !]

With the lack of actual competition at the high-end consumer parts market, intel and their partners had the opportunity to overinflate prices tremendously over the last couple of years.

That doesn't mean amd won't enjoy a hefty margin of their own. But it is yet too soon to call the winners.

I built a i7 6core q2 2015 for myself. At the time Assetto Corsa was pre-V1.3, I kept using the old graphics card for a couple of months... ...the performance was THE SAME compared to my previous Phenom-II 4-core.

There are so many factors involved when it comes to performance of ACTUAL SOFTWARE that you run... ...the only reason I upgraded at that time was: someone in the family needed (as in, REALLY needed a more modern machine), yet it would not justify building new for him. So I made an opportunistic deal...
...and well, I could need 8..10 SATA ports. I know I am crazy, but it kind-a, sort-a made sense for me to upgrade. Performance-wise, for the most part: it was a minor bump.
Capabilities-wise, it was "nice".

Most of all, it was expensive as f__k.

[Ricky Sauce]

Originally posted by Gen. Leopold von Flockenstuffen:

Those chips aren't focused at gamers, they're more for power users and content creators kinda thing.

Might want to check again... Review kits have been sent out for the Ryzen chips, they are demolishing Intels current lineup... Hell, even running RAM at 3400mhz

Furthermore, yes, it's worth getting something more than a quad core. Especially with DX12 and Vulkan starting to get used to take advantage of more cores.

If you plan on streaming or recording videos, it'll also help even more. Not to mention with multitasking WHILE gaming.

[Mr Crisp]

Originally posted by Bruce Leroy:

Originally posted by Gen. Leopold von Flockenstuffen:

Those chips aren't focused at gamers, they're more for power users and content creators kinda thing.

Might want to check again... Review kits have been sent out for the Ryzen chips, they are demolishing Intels current lineup... Hell, even running RAM at 3400mhz

Furthermore, yes, it's worth getting something more than a quad core. Especially with DX12 and Vulkan starting to get used to take advantage of more cores.

If you plan on streaming or recording videos, it'll also help even more. Not to mention with multitasking WHILE gaming.

He didn't suggest the performance vs Intel, quite why you feel the need to shoehorn in the performance over Intel, when he is correct- the 8 core 16 thread CPUs are total overkill `just` for gaming, hence AMD showing off such things as streaming live gaming whilst playing and experiencing no frame drops compared to an Intel CPU.

These CPUs are not `directly` focused on gaming but overall `power user` performance from streaming, encoding, rendering, production and obviously these chips will be superb for gaming, thats a bonus IMO.

The Ryzen CPUs don't even need to outperform Intel CPUs, if they can match the perfomance at half the price, AMD is on to a winner- surely.

I have an Intel i7 5820k @4.2ghz 6 core, 12 thread and its total overkill for modern gaming currently, even if a lot of games do in fact, including AC, thread well across the cores.

[Quadg]

the trend in chips over the last 5-10 years has been to make them more efficient and smaller.
not faster.

blame tablets/ smartphones.

the good news is that a gaming rig now last over 5 years...

i see no need to update my 5 year old i7 lga2011 rig..

because i will be updating to a i7 lga2011gen 3... that isnt really any faster..

ive never had a processor last this long and i have been building gaming rigs since 1996..

my 6 core i7 has a great mix between thread performance on multiple cores. and single core performance for dealing wth older software. (4.5ghz overclock)

its that mix which beats AMDs
they are good for threading but far worse for single thread applications.

and a good gaming rig needs both. because you cant trust the guys writing the software :)

[Ricky Sauce]

Originally posted by Quadg:

the trend in chips over the last 5-10 years has been to make them more efficient and smaller.
not faster.

blame tablets/ smartphones.

the good news is that a gaming rig now last over 5 years...

i see no need to update my 5 year old i7 lga2011 rig..

because i will be updating to a i7 lga2011gen 3... that isnt really any faster..

ive never had a processor last this long and i have been building gaming rigs since 1996..

my 6 core i7 has a great mix between thread performance on multiple cores. and single core performance for dealing wth older software. (4.5ghz overclock)

its that mix which beats AMDs
they are good for threading but far worse for single thread applications.

and a good gaming rig needs both. because you cant trust the guys writing the software :)

The thing about that is they get smaller and faster. Sure, Intel beats AMD by a few hundred in benchmarks... Is that really something to hold back? Considering AMD beats Intel every way and barely loses is pretty awesome when you think about it compared to price point. I'll lose ~100 points on a worthless test to pay way less... But, whatever.

Single core clock speed is a thing of the past. lol, we're in a different age now and games going foward are going to take advatange of all these cores

[Talkie Toaster]

Originally posted by Bruce Leroy:

Originally posted by Quadg:

the trend in chips over the last 5-10 years has been to make them more efficient and smaller.
not faster.

blame tablets/ smartphones.

the good news is that a gaming rig now last over 5 years...

i see no need to update my 5 year old i7 lga2011 rig..

because i will be updating to a i7 lga2011gen 3... that isnt really any faster..

ive never had a processor last this long and i have been building gaming rigs since 1996..

my 6 core i7 has a great mix between thread performance on multiple cores. and single core performance for dealing wth older software. (4.5ghz overclock)

its that mix which beats AMDs
they are good for threading but far worse for single thread applications.

and a good gaming rig needs both. because you cant trust the guys writing the software :)

The thing about that is they get smaller and faster. Sure, Intel beats AMD by a few hundred in benchmarks... Is that really something to hold back? Considering AMD beats Intel every way and barely loses is pretty awesome when you think about it compared to price point. I'll lose ~100 points on a worthless test to pay way less... But, whatever.

Single core clock speed is a thing of the past. lol, we're in a different age now and games going foward are going to take advatange of all these cores

Ryzen is actually behind in gaming over Intel so far, so that might be something to consider if you're thinking about making a purchase, though buying a Ryzen 7 purely for a gaming machine isn't the best idea, these aren't gaming chips. Maybe it will get fixed with some BIOS updates but as it stands there are currently performance issues in 1080p gaming and with the SMT actually reducing frame rates, AMD are also trying to sort out dev kits so developers can learn to take advantage of the technology and improve performance.

[Ricky Sauce]

Originally posted by Gen. Leopold von Flockenstuffen:

Originally posted by Bruce Leroy:

The thing about that is they get smaller and faster. Sure, Intel beats AMD by a few hundred in benchmarks... Is that really something to hold back? Considering AMD beats Intel every way and barely loses is pretty awesome when you think about it compared to price point. I'll lose ~100 points on a worthless test to pay way less... But, whatever.

Single core clock speed is a thing of the past. lol, we're in a different age now and games going foward are going to take advatange of all these cores

Ryzen is actually behind in gaming over Intel so far, so that might be something to consider if you're thinking about making a purchase, though buying a Ryzen 7 purely for a gaming machine isn't the best idea, these aren't gaming chips. Maybe it will get fixed with some BIOS updates but as it stands there are currently performance issues in 1080p gaming and with the SMT actually reducing frame rates, AMD are also trying to sort out dev kits so developers can learn to take advantage of the technology and improve performance.

SMT is actually doing way better than what Intel has to offer, where are you getting this from? Since chips have actually been released, it's been known that SMT is doing quite well and AMD is actually one upping Intel in this department...

And being behind intel, I'm assuming you're looking at some screwed information? I'm looking at this from a consumer standpoint and not a fanboy standpoint lol. The benchmarks I see tell a different tale.

I want the best bang for the buck and it's sad that AMD is delivering on both fronts for less than what Intel is offering. I was getting an Intel, now, I'm not lol.

[Julian Rignall]

From the reviews I have seen Ryzen is great for productivity, video rendering etc
but not as good as intel for gaming.Then again it is a brand new design and prob
needs tweaking and refining.

[Alien Identity]

Originally posted by Bruce Leroy:

Originally posted by Gen. Leopold von Flockenstuffen:

Ryzen is actually behind in gaming over Intel so far, so that might be something to consider if you're thinking about making a purchase, though buying a Ryzen 7 purely for a gaming machine isn't the best idea, these aren't gaming chips. Maybe it will get fixed with some BIOS updates but as it stands there are currently performance issues in 1080p gaming and with the SMT actually reducing frame rates, AMD are also trying to sort out dev kits so developers can learn to take advantage of the technology and improve performance.

SMT is actually doing way better than what Intel has to offer, where are you getting this from? Since chips have actually been released, it's been known that SMT is doing quite well and AMD is actually one upping Intel in this department...

And being behind intel, I'm assuming you're looking at some screwed information? I'm looking at this from a consumer standpoint and not a fanboy standpoint lol. The benchmarks I see tell a different tale.

I want the best bang for the buck and it's sad that AMD is delivering on both fronts for less than what Intel is offering. I was getting an Intel, now, I'm not lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7UBHjtCXhU

Many reviews are showing the 1800X is not to good at games benchmarks, but that may change in the future as BIOS updates are released.