Help with hasbullas cpu

[Steve]

Does i7-4790 processor work well with new games.
And if i would need a new processor does newer processors work with GIGABYTE B85M-DS3H-A LGA1150 Motherboard

[_I_]

most game devs aim for hardware around 5rys old at the min reqs

future games will have instructions that the 4th gen i series do not have

there are a few games that the aii/pii cant run but fx can
fx has sse 4.2 and ssse3, while pii/aii do not
even tho some pii were faster cpus than fx

between 4th gen to 9th gen intel had no real competition and made few changes to instruction sets
https://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/522/Intel_Core_i7_i7-4790K_vs_Intel_Core_i9_i9-9900.html
the ones that were added look to be more security or system related, should not used directly for games

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

i7-4790/k is an old cpu and is very weak these days in modern games. In PLANTY of games it can't even produce 60 Fps. Games like Assassin's Creed Odyssey or Cyberpunk 2077 etc. See proof below-

The video linked earlier by Mr. Escorve above shows it. Just go to 13.25 and also 15.40 minute timestamp in that video. You will see.

You can also see the following Cyberpunk video from 01.50 minute timestamp. The fps drop happens when driving cars in city demanding areas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjZ9j49U5xo

[r.linder]

Diposting pertama kali oleh 🌈Cloud Boy🌈:

i7-4790/k is an old cpu and is very weak these days in modern games. In PLANTY of games it can't even produce 60 Fps. Games like Assassin's Creed Odyssey or Cyberpunk 2077 etc. See proof below-

The video linked earlier by Mr. Escorve above shows it. Just go to 13.25 and also 15.40 minute timestamp in that video. You will see.

You can also see the following Cyberpunk video from 01.50 minute timestamp. The fps drop happens when driving cars in city demanding areas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjZ9j49U5xo

Go to 13:25 and you can literally see it do 59 and higher, and it's ultra settings, pretty much expected for CP2077. That's more GPU than CPU because lower settings gives better results.

Are you trolling, or are you just off your rocker again?
>"4790K BAD! UPGRADE TO 11900K TODAY!"
Is what I basically take from that.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

The fps drops to 53 fps in 13.32 minutes and only 51 fps in 15.45 minute timestamp in that video. The video was recorded using 1080Ti 1080p, so it can't be a GPU bottleneck. Ultra settings needs more cpu power so the fps drops to 50s. it has Nothing to do with the GPU. As anyone can see in the NEXt video linked in comment # 17, an RTX 3080 has been used with i7-4790 in that video but still the fps drops to mid 50 fps. See the video between 01.50 to 02.05 minute timestamp. The fps constantly drops to as low as 48 fps in some places.

[_I_]

for cpu testing you need to eliminate any possible gpu bottleneck
1080ti isnt high end gpu anymore
newer games at 1080p maxed is more of a gpu limit with it
should be done at 720p usign a 3090 for a pure cpu difference test

again, 4th gen is older, non k is even slower
from 4790k oc'd to the i3 10100 is more of a lateral move than upgrade
10th+ gen i5/i7/i9 are a good upgrade from it

[r.linder]

Diposting pertama kali oleh 🌈Cloud Boy🌈:

The fps drops to 53 fps in 13.32 minutes and only 51 fps in 15.45 minute timestamp in that video. The video was recorded using 1080Ti 1080p, so it can't be a GPU bottleneck. Ultra settings needs more cpu power so the fps drops to 50s. it has Nothing to do with the GPU. As anyone can see in the NEXt video linked in comment # 17, an RTX 3080 has been used with i7-4790 in that video but still the fps drops to mid 50 fps. See the video between 01.50 to 02.05 minute timestamp. The fps constantly drops to as low as 48 fps in some places.

So what if it drops? It's ultra settings dude, it was smoothly 60+ in lower presets and DLSS would bring more frames.

[Illusion of Progress]

Diposting pertama kali oleh _I_:

most game devs aim for hardware around 5rys old at the min reqs

Not quite as clear as that. I'd say they target a number of things, with market adoption taking a big priority.

GPUs as of late have been pushing up towards early generation Maxwell and 2 GB as minimum, so GTX 660 and GTX 670 in particular. I noticed these GPUs became more common lately after nVidia dropped support for Fermi and earlier, and 1 GB VRAM is really becoming too little for many titles, even for minimums.

Meanwhile, stuff like GTX 1060 (or even higher) are now more commonly showing up as "recommended" so these cards will less and less "max" titles out going forward (recommended doesn't always get you higher settings).

For CPUs, I'd say even older still works, namely for Intel (AMD pre-Ryzen is pretty struggling, the rare cases where some titles work better on, say, an FX instead of a Sandy Bridge Core i5 due to threading advantage aside, and even that usually helps in only in select circumstances within the title and not throughout). Resident Evil 2 2019 called for above my Core i5 2500K at the time, yet I not only ran it, but ran it well, maintaining 60 FPS+ (uncapped I'd see near 100 FPS or higher at times, typically 80 to 90s though). Even then, I suspect GPU was holding it up as lowering settings (this was a "cheese strategy" at some bosses, like the first one, due to knife mechanics being tied to frame rate), I'd see higher. Thing is, at a certain point, developers probably only go so far old with testing, but that doesn't mean older can't work. Granted, yeah, my Core i5 was overclocked, but many older Sandy Bridge to Haswell CPUs make up some ground specifically if they are.

We're really in strange times. In days gone, you'd be hard pressed to run something well when it was three years old, let alone five, and I don't mean "my x80 GPU isn't getting 120 FPS+ at max settings anymore so got to replace it" but "this GPU that barely got 60 FPS all the time is giving me a slideshow now". Advancements slowed, so it's not a straight case of "older than x years old means it's not going to work well as it's not given thought".

Diposting pertama kali oleh _I_:

future games will have instructions that the 4th gen i series do not have

Right, but I was asking if any right now require instructions newer than Haswell. The "highest" instruction I've seen mandatory was AVX, meaning as far back as Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer will work. I've seen AVX512 used, but not mandatory. However, I might be unfamiliar with some that do, hence I was asking.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

At this point, anything below Intel 8th Gen should really be ditched, or put to use for lesser demanding Games. Modern Games while they might not "require" such newer CPUs just yet, they can easily take advantage of in most games that aren't coded like crap.

[Illusion of Progress]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Bad 💀 Motha:

At this point, anything below Intel 8th Gen should really be ditched, or put to use for lesser demanding Games.

Disagree. You leave something behind when you want more and are willing to afford what the difference costs, not when it's a given number of generations or years old. It's truly, truly that simple.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Bad 💀 Motha:

At this point, anything below Intel 8th Gen should really be ditched, or put to use for lesser demanding Games.

i agree, anything below Intel 8th Gen should really be ditched these days.
Because, before 8th gen, the CPUs are only 4c/ 8t, and as shown in this thread earlier, they can't even do 60 fps in modern AAA games.

I would not call it a good CPU which can't even produce 60 fps in games (except for only maybe 5 Ghz overclocked 7700k, borderline acceptable).

[Illusion of Progress]

Telling someone who is getting what they consider acceptable performance from their stuff that they should ditch it, because some other use can't reach some threshold, is like telling a high end gamer they need to get more RAM because 16 GB or 32 GB is too little for some scientific use. See how silly that is?

Also, fun fact; there's been hex core CPUs since the first generation Core i series came around, and there's quad core CPUs in the eleventh generation lineup, so if the criteria is that you should ditch anything less than a hex core, it's a pretty poor criteria to use "8th generation" as the defining point.

Another fun fact; many games still work surprisingly well on quad core CPUs, and many people are surprisingly happy with less than 120 FPS, and sometimes even 60 FPS. I know; the horror!

It's been said long ago by people far smarter than I but this is the ONE true Golden rule for upgrading. "You upgrade when what you have isn't doing what you want it to do (fast enough) AND when you find an option that gives you a performance increase at a cost you find worth it to you." Done. period. Fin. Age doesn't matter. Where it falls under some "product stack" doesn't matter. The second part is important, too, and it's often overlooked. It's why a lot of people are still on GTX 1060s and the like, despite there being FAR faster in 2016, and there being even MORE faster options in 2021. It's why my "HTPC" is a freak'n Core 2 based Dell. This really simple concept about PCs really seems to elude a lot of PC enthusiasts.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Illusion of Progress:

Also, fun fact; there's been hex core CPUs since the first generation Core i series came around, and there's quad core CPUs in the eleventh generation lineup, so if the criteria is that you should ditch anything less than a hex core, it's a pretty poor criteria to use "8th generation" as the defining point.

When i ( and presumably Bad Motha too) mentioned 8th gen, we meant normal consumer grade CPUs, not higher-end HEDT platform or Xeon. That's why i specifically mentioned 4c/8t CPUs, and i said they are ''unacceptable'' these days (with reasons). The point of argument is specific to 4c/8t CPUs only, not the whole 8th gen or before it. I don't know very well about 11th gen tho, and how they perform.

Diposting pertama kali oleh Illusion of Progress:

Another fun fact; many games still work surprisingly well on quad core CPUs, and many people are surprisingly happy with less than 120 FPS, and sometimes even 60 FPS. I know; the horror!

Yes i agree, many games run very well in quad cores, .....and also, many games runs very well in Pentium as well, or even on Core 2 Duo, and..., many people are very happy with those CPUs. Does it mean that Pentium and Core 2 Duo are good gaming CPU these days?
I don't think so. No.

As i said before, 4c/8t CPU's are not capable to do 60 fps in modern AAA games, 60 fps is the minimum acceptable standard in PC gaming these days. And I would not call it a good CPU which fails to produce 60 fps.

[Illusion of Progress]

Diposting pertama kali oleh 🌈Cloud Boy🌈:

When i ( and presumably Bad Motha too) mentioned 8th gen, we mean normal consumer grade CPUs, not higher-end HEDT platform or Xeon. That's why i specifically mentioned 4c/8t CPUs, and i said they are ''unacceptable'' these days (with reasons). The point of argument is specific to 4c/8t CPUs only, not the whole 8th gen (also not 11th gen with lower core count CPUs).

Then why not say "ditch anything less than a hex core" (or "anything less than the equivalent of a Core i7 8700" if that is the intended baseline), not "ditch anything older than 8th generation" if you realize it's not the actual criteria?

Diposting pertama kali oleh 🌈Cloud Boy🌈:

Yes i agree, many games run very well in quad cores, .....and also, many games runs very well in Pentium as well, or even on Core 2 Duo, and..., many people are very happy with those CPUs. Does it mean that Pentium and Core 2 Duo are good gaming CPU these days?
I don't think so. No.

This is getting pretty close to using circular reasoning and missing my entire point. Age... does... not... matter. This matters.

"You upgrade when what you have isn't doing what you want it to do (fast enough) AND when you find an option that gives you a performance increase at a cost you find worth it to you."

That is the ONLY thing that matters. If a person decides they want to upgrade partly for the sake of it (to get something different, or newer, whatever), then yes that is fine and a viable reason to upgrade, yes. Enthusiasts like building or tinkering. I am merely saying age, or "insert other specific criteria here" (like core count, or amount of RAM, or one of a million other things) is not something that should mean someone has to upgrade if it is otherwise providing them with performance that meats their desires, because in the end, that is mostly what matters to most people.

You're also arguing against a point I never even made. I never said a Core 2, or a Haswell, or whatever was "considered a good gaming CPU in 2021". I'm trying to get you think but you're not catching it. My main underlying point is what even determines this? When BUYING something, you should seek out what are the best options depending on what you value (ultimate performance, price to performance, etc.) and get that. That is true. That SAME criteria, however, does not have to constantly be applied to something you already own in order to justify keeping it. That is what you are not getting.

A Haswell provides "insert frame rate here" in "insert title here". This "insert value here" is not good for me in "insert year here". That's really how this reads to me. Um... okay? And? If it's working fine for someone, it's working fine for them. Either they are good enough with it, or something hasn't come along offering an improvement at a cost they personally deem worth it (and this might be a shocker, but some people are okay with far less than you, and others wait for far larger jumps than most PC enthusiasts do).

[_I_]

im still surprised at how well 4th gen has been holding up to newer cpus

yes, newer are faster, but not be enough to justify upgrades for most using 4690k/4790k oc'd
more cores on newer cpus is a good plus, but not all games need more than 4 or with ht

with cpu prices starting to go wonky, its even less incentive to upgrade now

but if you are happy and plays the games you play well, keep it, and save up for the upgrade

estimate a few hundred each year to save on the next upgrades
normally (without wonky covid/mining going on)
mid+ grade gpu = $200-300
cpu/mobo/ram = $200-400
full system = $700-1000

overall a new build about every 5 years = about $200/yr, will get most of the way to a upgrade every year
cpu/mobo/ram, or +drives/+ram, or case/psu, or gpu