I have played BF4, Thief, Dragon Age Inquisition and Sniper Elite III with Mantle/DX-11 with dGPUs and APUs and i can tell you are way wrong. There is nothing better than Mantle in those games and DX-11 cant even come close in gameplay.
Mantle is a mess it's still in beta for over a year now,although it does give you a boost in FPS it also gives you a lot of nasty FPS drops making the gameplay worse than with the slower DX11.
There is no doubt that DX12 will be in "beta" for just as long at least,it will be years until it finally runs as intended.
Despite how little more it is to get eight threads over an i5's four, though, it's arguably a waste of money (today) because very few games benefit at all from having more than four hardware threads - even console ports, which were natively 6+ threaded on the consoles.
6+ ? try 36+ for a standard console port.
I have played BF4, Thief, Dragon Age Inquisition and Sniper Elite III with Mantle/DX-11 with dGPUs and APUs and i can tell you are way wrong. There is nothing better than Mantle in those games and DX-11 cant even come close in gameplay.
It depends on the hardware. I played DA:I, and there was absolutely no difference between mantle and DX11, using the game's own built in benchmark. Now I have a relatively more powerful cpu than gpu, so it is the worst case for mantle. Granted, if you pair a powerful gpu with a weak cpu (a rather unlikely scenario IMO) you will see a benefit, but the blanket statement that DX-11 cannot come close to Mantle is an over-generalization.
It depends on the hardware. I played DA:I, and there was absolutely no difference between mantle and DX11, using the game's own built in benchmark. Now I have a relatively more powerful cpu than gpu, so it is the worst case for mantle. Granted, if you pair a powerful gpu with a weak cpu (a rather unlikely scenario IMO) you will see a benefit, but the blanket statement that DX-11 cannot come close to Mantle is an over-generalization.
No it is not,
There is more than fps performance alone, there are lower frametimes and more consistent fps with Mantle than DX-11.
I totally agree with your thinking.And how many of those threads require any significant CPU time?
One could argue that the answer is between one and five, and an i5 that has 60% faster cores would be able to run the four dominant threads and juggle the rest more quickly than an FX with 8 cores slower cores.
Mantle is a mess it's still in beta for over a year now,although it does give you a boost in FPS it also gives you a lot of nasty FPS drops making the gameplay worse than with the slower DX11. There is no doubt that DX12 will be in "beta" for just as long at least,it will be years until it finally runs as intended.
So performance boost that Valve got from Open GL is a lie then...
I was just commenting on this quote "even console ports, which were natively 6+ threaded on the consoles. " they don't change anything thread-wise on the ports.
Especially after seeing the Attila benchmarks I think ive about had my fill of my FX8350. I got it on sale for around 169.00 when it was first released but now I think its rans it course{at least with me}.
I have around 400 to spend on a CPU/Mobo combo and as I have always been an AMD user my knowledge of Intel is scant.
What are your thoughts on the I5 4690K, and will it still be a heavy contender in say 2-3 years down the road?
I'll be the first to answer your question instead of telling you that you are wrong to switch.
The light side, like VIA?
From what I've seen of Mantle, Intel and AMD CPUs both benefit from driver overhead and load distribution improvements, with chips like the i3 coming having some of the largest percent improvements. You might consider, rather than a 4690K, getting a cheap i7 Xeon instead, or even going with a 4790K.
The Xeon 1230V3 is clocked 200mhz lower than a (stock) 4690K but has hyperthreading for only a $10 premium, and you can opt for a cheaper H97 board and probably save around $50 between motherboard and cooler, making it a cheaper option overall.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116906
The 4790K is $90 more than the 4690K, but is clocked ~500mhz higher and has hyperthreading, and can probably also be paired with a much cheaper H97 board due to it being near the max clock one can generally get with Haswell without unreasonable voltage. You might still want an aftermarket cooler, but it's again possible to save ~$30 with a cheaper board, making it only a $60 (~20% on the CPU alone, much lower if you consider overall system cost) premium for eight threads and 15% higher clocks.
~
Despite how little more it is to get eight threads over an i5's four, though, it's arguably a waste of money (today) because very few games benefit at all from having more than four hardware threads - even console ports, which were natively 6+ threaded on the consoles. Although an i7 can be as much as 70% faster in scientific computing than an i5, in games you'll see very little benefit beyond the clockspeed advantage. It's interesting what that implies about FX chips.
EDIT: The argument for a Xeon or i7 is much stronger if you do any significant amount of non-gaming, computationally intensive work on your computer. I'm quite content to sit on my i5 for a long time though.
Hey! Second, not first.
VIA has optical interconnects now? Yowza!
6+ ? try 36+ for a standard console port.
And how many of those threads require any significant CPU time?
One could argue that the answer is between one and five, and an i5 that has 60% faster cores would be able to run the four dominant threads and juggle the rest more quickly than an FX with 8 cores slower cores.
I do not have equipment to measure frametime, but min and max were the same.
And to use the metric that AMD proponents seem to value over benchmarks anyway, it "felt" exactly the same.
It depends on the hardware. I played DA:I, and there was absolutely no difference between mantle and DX11, using the game's own built in benchmark.
Oh! Sorry.
I think as we move towards the low level API's and multi-threaded engines, having that FX 8 core is a better option than having an i5. Now, if he was talking about an 8T i7, alright, if you really want that very expensive performance.