Horizons Why an i7 processor?

BaldEagle

BaldEagle
I am starting to put together the spec of my next PC.
I see the recommended spec is for an i7 processor (it will be Intel for me).
Is there a specific reason why Hyper Threading is beneficial for ED?
Most everywhere I read that an i5 is the most cost-effective solution for gaming (for me only ED) with only marginal benefits in getting an i7.
I have not seen any performance figures for ED though.
Anyone got any hard facts that could be useful?
Thanks :)
 

Alec Turner

Alec Turner
I recently bought a new PC, basically for running ED: Horizons on (but also with a longer term view of supporting VR) and I also agonised over this one a bit. In the end I went for an i5 (partly to keep within my original 1K budget) and am happy to report that, with a GTX 970, it's running Horizons on Ultra settings at a steady 60fps on my 1080p monitor, silky smooth and looking gorgeous :D
 
Last edited:

Daffan

Daffan
An I5 is perfectly fine for games.

The I7 is much better in synthetic benchmarks because of hyperthreading, but actual game performance is almost identical.

i5 6600(non k or k) vs i7 6700(non k or k). If you do rendering or other big work stuff, an I7 will speed that up too.
 
Last edited:

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Ozric
Why shell out the extra money on an i7? ;)

Presuming that you are going to be playing games assumes that you will have a dedicated graphics card. One of the things that makes the i5 / i7 a bit more expensive and slightly less productive is the fact that they have onboard graphics. If you don't need the onboard graphics then consider going for a Xeon v3

I'm afraid I don't have hard facts for you, but when I last upgraded part of my system (end of last year) I was comparing the i5-4690k and the i7-4790k, I couldn't really justify the jump up in price to the i7. Then I discovered the Xeon v3 1231, it wiped the floor with the i5 and was just a little worse than the i7 (however the benefits of the lack on onboard (redundant) graphics meant it ran slightly cooler) but it was £100 cheaper than the i7. (It does also have hyperthreading)

I have 8Gb of ram and a Sapphire Vapor-x r9 280x and I run the game on Ultra hitting 60fps at virtually all times.
 
Last edited:

OldSalt

O
Max Factor said:
I have an i5 2500k, pretty old and that is working fine as well. I have yet to try VR with it, but will give it a go and upgrade when I really need to.
Click to expand...

Same here, motherboard enabled overclock and with a cheap watercooled setup runs clap cold. Horizons flys on that plus a 770GTX 4GB.
 

shadragon

shadragon
Bran Tse Mallory said:
i5 3470 running at stock 3.2Ghz with R9 390 8Gb + 8Gb RAM, game never dips beneath 60FPS. i7 Not essential for playing games.
Click to expand...
Turn off vsync and you'll get much higher than 60 fps.

As for the CPU comments earlier, the i7 has larger cache then the i5. The hyper threading of the i7 lets you handle processing more efficiently. Yes, an i5 will work almost as well as an i7 and will do if on a budget. However, the i7 will be able to handle a larger sustained load.

Applying the word "budget" to a gaming computer is a (metaphorical) criminal act in my mind. A true gaming PC should have the best name brand components you can put in there and easily out-perform the vast majority of other mass-produced computers.
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Ozric
shadragon said:
Applying the word "budget" to a gaming computer is a (metaphorical) criminal act in my mind. A true gaming PC should have the best name brand components you can put in there and easily out-perform the vast majority of other mass-produced computers.
Click to expand...

However you should also look around for better value components, which you can often find by doing a bit of digging. The graphics card is a prime example. Would you consider the brand to be AMD or the company that have modified it? You can always get cards by Sapphire, XFX, MSI etc. that are modified versions of worse standard cards, but they are cheaper and better. Same with the processor.
 
Last edited:

EUS

EUS
If you're going to do other things than gaming, i7 can kick much butt, ripping blu-rays, coverting video, adn the like. i7 shines.
 

Im_Lost

I
Daffan said:
An I5 is perfectly fine for games.

The I7 is much better in synthetic benchmarks because of hyperthreading, but actual game performance is almost identical.

i5 6600(non k or k) vs i7 6700(non k or k). If you do rendering or other big work stuff, an I7 will speed that up too.
Click to expand...

Not any more it's not. I7 is noticeably quicker in a few modern games. With dx12 the gap should grow even larger. We might see I5s being overtaken by AMD's high end chips soon.
 
Last edited:

vinnyph

V
I would suggest a gtx 980ti gpu with i5 cpu would perform better than gtx 980 gpu and i7 cpu but the price would be near.
Another way look at this is gaming performance increases more for buying a better graphics card than buying an i7 over a i5 cpu.
 

Im_Lost

I
Bad time to be buying now anyway. New CPUs will be out soon, as will GPUs.

But if you must buy right now go for a 5820k rather than a Skylake chip. Those are the best value for money, 6 physical cores and better overclockers.
 
Last edited:

vinnyph

V
I am waiting for pascal generation to see what happens as well. My gtx 670 and 3770k i7 will have to do for a little while longer.
 

Bran Tse Mallory

Bran Tse Mallory
shadragon said:
Turn off vsync and you'll get much higher than 60 fps.

As for the CPU comments earlier, the i7 has larger cache then the i5. The hyper threading of the i7 lets you handle processing more efficiently. Yes, an i5 will work almost as well as an i7 and will do if on a budget. However, the i7 will be able to handle a larger sustained load.

Applying the word "budget" to a gaming computer is a (metaphorical) criminal act in my mind. A true gaming PC should have the best name brand components you can put in there and easily out-perform the vast majority of other mass-produced computers.
Click to expand...

With vsync off the fps goes through the roof as does the temp n the card... I prefere it to be around 68c not 86c! Plus 4 cores is fine per application.
 

BaldEagle

BaldEagle
Thank you everyone who took time to reply - reps to all.
There is always something better 'coming soon', equally that creates some good value options.
I did very recently add a GTX 970 card (which I will retain) and it has been amazing, however my 6 year old i7 system is showing its age!
I suspect it will be a 'good' i5 solution, but I will read up on what is 'in the pipeline'. I am not sure I will ever go the VR route.
It is a pity there are no stats for ED running on various configurations.
Fly safely, Commanders :)
 

Alec Turner

Alec Turner
Bran Tse Mallory said:
With vsync off the fps goes through the roof as does the temp n the card... I prefer it to be around 68c not 86c! Plus 4 cores is fine per application.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but if the refresh rate of my monitor is 60hz then, if I turn vsync off and claim I'm seeing 100fps I'm kidding myself right? I'm still only seeing 60fps. As far as I can see, all I'm achieving by turning vsync off is increasing power consumption and potentially introducing some shearing? If you've got lots of extra fps in reserve (and aren't bothered about power consumption[SIZE=1]*1[/SIZE]) I'd have thought you'd be better off increasing supersampling (to improve anti-aliasing), as long as you remain at or over your monitor refresh rate.

[SIZE=1][B]*1[/B][/SIZE] I recently had one of those "smart" electricity meters fitted (the kind where you can see little graphs of daily power usage). Aside from things like boiling the kettle, there's this almighty spike where I'm playing Elite (not when the computer is switched on, just when I'm actually playing the game) :eek: Let this be a warning to anyone who's partner is unaware of the extent of their "gaming habit".
 
Last edited:

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Ozric
Alec Turner said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but if the refresh rate of my monitor is 60hz then, if I turn vsync off and claim I'm seeing 100fps I'm kidding myself right? I'm still only seeing 60fps. As far as I can see, all I'm achieving by turning vsync off is increasing power consumption and potentially introducing some shearing?
Click to expand...

Yes technically. If in doubt always ask/check on Toms Hardware :D

A 60hz monitor refreshes the screen 60 times per second. Therefore, a 60hz monitor is only capable of outputting 60fps. It can still feel smoother to play at a higher framerate than your monitor can display however, because input lag with your mouse will be reduced. You might also start to see tearing though, which happens when your videocard is rendering frames faster than your monitor can display them.
Click to expand...

So although it may appear slightly smoother the question you need to ask is, is it really worth it for the increase temp/power consumption?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom