Core i7 a minimum for The Evil Within

I have a feeling that this is going to turn out the same way watch dogs did with the 6 gig ram nonsense. People with 4g ram play that game just fine, better than on consoles even.

@RyviusARC said:

@clyde46 said:

Well I assume you didn't know that by the way you worded your sentence.

You say that hyperthreading doesn't do much and then compare the 8 core AMD to an i5.

Hyperthreading can help a bit if used correctly.

Just look at how the core i3 is able to perform better than the 4 core Phenom II x4 965 even though the i3 is a dual core and the AMD cpu is a quad core.

The i3 can receive a huge boost in performance when hyperthreading is on in games that use 4 threads like Battlefield.

So the i7 could possibly get a good boost in performance in games that support (and need) more than 4 threads....but it will be quite a while before games start needing more than 4 threads.

But you are comparing the latest Intel i3 vs a CPU from AMD that is a few years old. Intel's core performance is vastly superiour to AMD's that is why you are seeing 4 core i5's run neck and neck with an 8 core from AMD. However, if you check this review out, there is only about a 2-3FPS difference between an i7 and a i5 from the same processor family.

That is because the games don't use more than 4 threads. Even the few games that use more than 4 threads are usually not coded well for it.

The i3 with hyperthreading off vs on is quite a big difference and once games become demanding enough to require 8 thread/cores you could see the same improvement from an i7 CPU since they both use the same hyperthreaded design.

Here is the problem, Intels i3's with HT didnt start out pacing AMD's Phenom 2 X4 's until the i3's from 2012 onward when their performance per clock was 2x faster, allowing those two cores to perform on equal or better terms then P2 X4's. Now with the i7's the quad cores total performance is virtually the same as i5 from same gen. HT will only allow small gains from being more efficient with the use of more threads but wont give large gains in gaming. Now the 6 or 8 cored i7's since they have more cores will allow hell of alot more gains with HT then i7 quads.

@topgunmv said:

@04dcarraher said:

@topgunmv said:

@mikhail said:

3dmark isn't a game.

But crysis 3 is.

Heavy multi-threading is the future.

As you can see same gen i5 and i7 = 11% difference, now when you crank up the settings instead of using such a low resolution as above you see the real gap in cpu performance with AMD cpu's. core performance> threads

Looks like it's still in the same order.

That is Intel far superior core performance vs AMD's "MOAR CORS!" view of things.

Yeah, and Wolfenstein also recommended it, even though it could run on toasters. An i7 doesn't necessarily mean a 4770k or something; it could very well be the first gen i7s.

Works on consoles with those lol AMD APU CPUs, but needs an i7 for the PC?

Not tryin to be captain obvious here, but the only reason I can think of, is because they can't be bothered to re-code it for less cores. But why? Everyone else does, so that can't be it.

Also why do people keep bringing up 'old i7's'? Anyone with a decent i5 shouldn't have to think about upgrading for anything right now.