Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er
CPU these is days is only looked as Bottleneck when it comes to 120Hz. To get 120Hz not only you need 2 GPUs but a very fast overclocked CPU. If CPU cant deliver more then 80 fps at a certain game then you save $ buy not blowing it on multiple GPUs.
Lets say you have one card and you are getting 60-70 fps. You expect 100-120 fps once you add second card. Best way to find out is lower setting for the game you play. If you are not getting those high fps and only something like 80-90 fps then the second GPU will not help.
Most people to eliminate CPU bottleneck crank up AA. doing so GPUs hit the wall fist. Comparing CPUs this way is not a very good way to do. Lets take 2 examples.
Both same GPU.
Game X @ Max Settings both get ~ 70 fps.
So CPU A = CPU B end of story.
Game X @ Medium Setting CPU A get 90 fps CPU B get 80 fps.
CPU A is faster.
People here are saying because i play at those setting CPU B is as fast as CPU A end of story.
Also all the games tested work very well with CFX and are all AMD games. You need like 20-30 games to come to a conclusion 8 Core = 4 faster cores.
Im sorry but you are making absolutely no sense here.
Your argument seems to say.
1, 120Hz monitor there is a diff. Except not many people have or want a 120Hz monitor. And as blind tests have shown only seasoned gamers can tell the diff.
2. Games at low resolution 800 x 600 fair better on Intel. Who gives a crap no one with high end hardware will ever play on that.
3. We should all play at medium settings as to give Intel the proper advantage, instead of max settings like our rigs can handle.
I find it truley amazing that in weeks and months prior almost all Intel guys said "Intel will destroy AMD in gaming" and "AMD cpu's bottleneck higherend GPUs, specifically in crossfire/SLI"
Yet these guys are showing proof that is a bunch of B.S. Is AMD 100% superior to Intel? no not by any stretch, and nobody here has said that. They are just disprooving some of the propaganda from the Intel camp.
All these guys are showing is that a AMD 8350 will game and run high end GPU's perfectly fine.
Also, you guys seem to be getting the definition of bottleneck confused.
a. A narrow or obstructed section, as of a highway or a pipeline.
b. A point or an area of traffic congestion.
Meaning if the GPU usage is at anything other than 98-99% usage than you have a case. IF the GPU's on both rigs are being maxed yet Intel pulls more FPS that is not a bottleneck, it is just a architecture advantage. There is a huge difference. Intel possess the better architecture, no question, but AMD is not bottlenecking.