Originally Posted by SYPH
I agree with Yoo. With Direct X 12 and how it handles multi threading, I wonder how the Athlon series will fare paired with high end GPU. Makes me wonder if going for the FX series was a wiser choice for future proof wise
DX12 isn't the crucial part of the equation, it's how many simultaneous threads that the game developer can or will code their game to run. And they're not likely, even if they actually care to optimize for multiple cores, that they're going to code for more than four threads anytime soon. The "sweet spot" for gaming rigs these days is an Intel i5, a 4c/4t CPU. This is why recent games are being targeted for four threads and don't always run optimally on Pentium G3258. Since an 860K is already 4c/4t, a game programmed for four threads isn't going to be gimped by running on one.
Anything that can support more than four simultaneous threads is still going to run on a quad-core. There are only so many tasks that a game can off-load to an extra core, and there would be very little time, even on totally optimized code, when eight threads would ever be active at once. A game is going to care more about IPC and FP performance, both of which are a lot better on a Steamroller core than a Piledriver core. And by the time we might see anything that can actually run on six or eight threads and max them out, no one's going want to run an FX processor because it's going to be seriously obsolete. We'll probably be three or four generations of CPU's beyond where we are now. At least.
DX12 is more about reducing overhead between the hardware and the software as it's about better running across multiple cores. The closer to the metal that a game can run, without adding complex software layers between the game and the hardware, the better. This is why games are playable on weak console hardware--they're able to run closer to the metal. This was the whole idea behind Mantle, and it's also the idea behind DX12 and Vulkan.