Originally Posted by Darklyric
oc'd sb or stock? Sc2 from my experience stress the crap out of 1 core and barely uses the other three and both my I7 920 and 8350 rigs.
Also sc2 ruined my gpu ocs.... i mean i can play anything else in cf (7950's) @1250core and 1450mem and 1.25core with rock stable <65c temps. I don't see any performance gain from cf in sc2 at all (actually worse fps usually) and i have to back my core and mem down to 1100core and 1300 mem on the one card with like 40% utilization... I think its the game honestly.
SC2 relies heavily on a main game thread, so with a powerful CPU it'll look like that. You don't need much juice on the GPU's cause you are CPU bound.
To quote Planetside 2 interview -
We have the exact same kind of Achilles’ heel on the PC too. People who have AMD chips have a disadvantage, because a single core on an AMD chip doesn’t really have as much horsepower and they really require you to kind of spread the load out across multiple cores to be able to take full advantage of the AMD processors.
Our engine sucks at that right now. We are multi-threaded, but the primary gameplay thread is very expensive. The biggest piece of engineering work that they’re doing right now, and it’s an enormous effort, is to go back through the engine and re-optimize it to be really, truly multi-threaded and break the gameplay thread up. That’s a very challenging thing to do because we’re doing a lot of stuff – tracking all these different players, all of their movements, all the projectiles, all the physics they’re doing.
It’s very challenging to split those really closely connected pieces of functionality across in multiple threads. So it’s a big engineering task for them to do, but thankfully once they do it, AMD players who’ve been having sub-par performance on the PC will suddenly get a massive boost – just because of being able to take the engine and re-implement it as multi-threaded.
I’m very excited about that because I have a lot of friends, lots of people who are more budget minded, going for AMD processors because nine times out of ten they give a lot of bang for the buck. Where it really breaks down is on games with one really big thread. PlanetSide’s probably a prime example of that.
Much of the same applies to Starcraft 2, and its expensive AI, pathfinding etc.
And it's one of the main problems with Bulldozer type design, that in many CPU intensive situations, multithreading is more difficult, thus often significantly more expensive (more programmers, more time) which leads to companies ignoring it - and sad cases such as one of the best competitive games in the world right now having a lead of as much as 75% or more on overclocked haswell vs piledriver (talking about MINIMUM FPS), because it's held back so much by the main game threadEdited by Cyro999 - 8/8/13 at 11:46pm