Gizmodo
Your PC? It sucks, it doesn't have enough cores. Sure, you could get a new multi-core processor like a Phenom or Core 2 Quad, adding like 2 or 3 cores to your rig. Or! You could get a new graphics card instead and get over one hundred extra cores. And more cores = more better, right?
Actually, even though Nvidia's argument seems slightly retarded and self-serving, it has a bit of merit—as you go up in CPU price ranges, the price to performance ratio drops pretty steadily. And if you're running Windows Vista, you actually need a solid graphics card to run it without any hitches, even if you're not gaming. So instead of plowing an extra $100 into a slightly faster processor that'll net you minimal performance gains, you'd get more out of it investing in a better graphics card. [Nvidia via Pop Sci]
Comments
My popular science better be coming today...
Hmm... I'll keep that in mind when I buy a new computer.
114 cores? Plays games faster. Melts polar ice caps. Who could ask for more in an all in one device?
And more cores = more better, right?
It sounds funny but you know most people think like that when buying a computer.
What if u get quad core + uber graphx card?
Massive damage?
Why would they draw those grotesque writings onto it? seems like a poor marketing move on their part, really kinda demeans the reader.
Ahh, don't let the mainstream know what we computer hackers know!
@P3nnst8r: yes. you can actually play crysis then, a little beam of light shines from the sky and an angel delivers you crysis and says to thee "You may turn on High detail!" and there is a chorus and everything.
Because every traditional PC these days has a Core 2 Quad processor and a GPU from 2004.
more ram would probably help more than graphics card if you're not gaming
yup, just picked up a new Vista HP desktop last night, Dual core, Nvidia 6600 graphics, will definately need upgrade!
@P3nnst8r: it doesn't really improve your computer,in fact, if you don't add enough RAM.Add 4GB then you've a really ubber machine.
@Hvedhrungr:
since when is the 8500 GT from 2004?
Hey, you want a CHEAP speed boost? Buy a 4GB (or >2x the total RAM you have installed) USB thumb drive and set your Page File to a System managed size on that drive. Plug it into an unused port somewhere on the back of the PC, format it, delete the C drive page file and create a new system managed one on the new drive.
Just remember not to accidentally "soft eject" it, otherwise your system will come to a grinding halt until you reboot.
I did this with a 4Gb drive on my older HP laptop and hid the drive in the secret HP digital drive bay USB port. Works great.
Yawn. It's not like people are releasing games for the PC anymore. (sucks)
@Weihovah: Yup, as would a larger monitor.
You can never have too much RAM, or too much hard drive space. Screen real estate is important too.
It'd be nice if Nvidia would spend more time fixing their drivers and less time on PR.
It won't be too long before video goes the way sound did on the PC-- Settle for the onboard stuff, 'cause it's good enough.
...Vista does this for you, but for those on XP, it gets you most of the way there with minimal additional effort.
What's funny about this is that, after working at an internship all summer, I got an nVidia 8800GTX, an Intel Q6600, plus 4GB of RAM... so I have the best of both of these hypothetical rigs XD
This is a really strange argument. I mean, for some people, it maybe true. Gamers for sure.
But what about those who edit video at home as a hobby? The 'traditional pc' on the left will be significantly faster at encoding that video because of the extra cores.
Also, for basic productivity and photo editing, beefing up your graphics card means absolutely nothing.
Finally, the argument for a 'solid' graphics card no longer holds for Vista. Modern desktop's integrated video is more than enough. By modern I mean the Intel X1300, Nvidia 7XX and ATI 2xxx series. All far more powerful than the vista desktop needs.
File this under marketing hype, no more.
The technical reason a 2 core CPU with enhnaced graphics card can outperform a 4 core CPU with acceptable graphics card is that there really is not any software that takes advantages of a 4 core CPU yet. However, graphics processing can use as many 'cores' as it can find since there are so many things being processed graphically on a system at any one time.
That said, I have a question:
Would someone really buy a top of the line 4 core CPU system and put a somewhat crappy graphics card on it? Just curious. Seems like someone that is shelling out the bucks would not skimp on the graphics.
@1stage: Ok. That's a smart idea. That had never even occurred to me. Totally doing something like that on my home system when I get home today.
@sisedi: do you mean the red comments that Giz mosre than likely added?
Wow! This is from the same company that causes some ridiculous percentage of vista crashes, and their site says "NVIDIA® GeForce® GPU makes your PC run silky smooth with amazing visuals" Yup, Luv me some silky smooth BSODs.
I'll stick with my mid-range ATI HD2600XT card thanks, catalyst control center may crash from time to time, but at least it does not take vista along for the ride.
@Monty: Yea, see my post just before yours.
Home video editing will LOVE 4 cores (Adobe Premier for example), and make encoding times far lower.
Just doesn't take advantage of the graphics card.
@iscangel: Yeah, im shopping for my next build. My friend just coughed up 1800 on a pretty killer machine. I am thinking about waiting till the summer 'cause i'm poor and i am anticipating some better models to come out.
Good time to buy now or wait?
Yes I am Canadian, and Yes I am Biased and Yes I want my Matrox Millenium back!
@Log1c: What if you ask for very high? Does the chasm to hell open up and Steve Jobs appear, cackling? (Yet lightly sobbing because Macs still can't play it, or anything for that matter)
By the way, what do the percentages mean?
@P3nnst8r: It'll be a few more months before any significantly better stuff drops. Now is as good a time as any.
@Sean Harrington: Actually that won't cause that much of a speed boost at all, if any. Most USB flash drives have a slower write time than HDD, specially if you have a really cheap flash drive. Rather, get a SSD and install it through IDE and put your page file there, or create a ram disk on your ram, and put it there.
The best option would be to just pump up your ram to max, and get rid of a page file. The page file really only needs to be used if you have very little ram. Check your sys resources. Very little of the page file is actually used, and even less ram is used. Another thing to do would be up your ram speed. Instead of that 333mhz bump it up to a higher speed, if your mobo can handle it. just my opinion.
I just got a new dual-core apple computer...loves it!
[i23.photobucket.com]
but what if you had ONE REALLY BIG CORE? that would so kick ass....
@Blackti3:
I've got one that plays games and actually has an SLI arrangement.
Sucks to you!
@Blackti3: uh-oh
* ducks, running for cover *
@link12245: Buying more ram is the BEST solution to increasing your computer's performance. I agree with your comment
@Sleeper_Service:
Click the link to the photo in my original comment :)
@Sleeper_Service:
Click the link to the picture in my original comment :)
[gizmodo.com]
yer, so maybe their claim that buying one of their cards to get "better" performance might not be so true.
@ph15h: yeah me too I'm pissed Ive been a subscriber for a long time and recently its seems pop sci and pop mechanics comes out to the news stand at least two days before I get mine in the mail......It's annoying
The problem is, how many non-gaming functions exist on a PC that your basic IGP can't handle? Essentially, what's the real world benefit to a dedicated gfx card outside of games? The real problem is that for the huge percentage of computer users that buy laptops in the current era, it's not as simple as "pay $50 for an 8600 GT, no problem," it's far more complicated.
{COUGH! COUGH!}
...Clears throat...
DUHHHH!!!!!!!
Srsly, if people aren't aware of this by now, the PC is doomed. No wonder consoles get better and more games.
@Blackti3: Very PUNNY... haha...... he.........he
@FrankenPC:
Err... no it isn't. People have been saying that for years and they keep getting it wrong.
@Blackti3: XD
@Modred189: anyone who is serious about encoding needs to read up on gpu assist....quad core has nothing on it
@Modred189: Not true, unless you are running a x64 based system with native apps on a PC. If you are on a Mac w/ Leopard you are good to go.
If the application using it is programmed to take advantage of multi-core processor, then yoes it's FTW, but otherwise it won't do a difference.
It will simply use 1 core and leave the others sitting there, flipping their thumbs.
@PeteUALaw: 19 minutes of people getting the joke... and then YOU came along.
I can has Graphix Cardz?
@Sean Harrington: Performance boosts can come from having your pagefile on ANY drive other than the drive containing the OS, particularly if that drive is dedicated to paging.
However, USB flash drives have only so many write cycles before they die out. Unless you want to spend $50 every few months on a new flash drive, you'd be better off just buying a small HD dedicated to the task.
Good thing I just ordered a video card.
Nothing special, just a little old-style PCI card to pep up a four-year-old secondary system with anemic Intel Extreme Graphics.
Good timing, me just reading this and all. :)
I've been looking for an excuse to change my E6600 3.0gHz for more than a year now, and it still isnt worth the investment.
I could buy a E8500 for 200€, and i'd get, what, 10 frames more?
Looks to me like q3 of this year will be the time i'll upgrade.
Could probably run several instances of each of my entire xvid porn collection at once though.
CPUs have never been very optimized. They aren't meant to be. But they are universal. GPUs can in theory now accelerate a lot more. However they need the software. We've been promised mpeg4 and x264 encoding in order of 10x faster via GPUs for years, but they still have not reached consumer hands. Intel video drivers are actually pretty terrible. Some instances, its better to actually disable GPU shading altogether to get better performance. Nvidia and ATI are doing pretty decent jobs on drivers, pretty damn close every game works on nearly every release, even ancient games. If you think about the incredible permutations of hardware available for PCs, its amazing how game developers are able to get stuff to even run. It's so much easier on a console, you don't have to worry at all.
Also i don't know what Sean Harrington is babbling about swap files for. It doesn't even work. WinXP does not initialize USB in time for the swap file to be created on the drive. Effectively he is running with no swap file at all and has a usb drive in there waisting 3v.
@Sean Harrington: What is the "secret HP digital drive bay USB port"? Sounds cool...
@bosskev: lolx. so i'm guessing they downgraded to a 2core processor and used the money saved to buy the 8800GT. smart marketing scheme.
Or if you're really going to make a monster gaming rig how about a Quad Core extreme processor plus that 8800GT then you're really getting the bang for your buck and kicking almost all other people's PC's
Comment on this post
Reply by EmailLogin with your username and password below. Or comment on this post via email.
Forgot your username or password? New User?