how many cores video editing and gaming use, at the same time ?

[settlementmen]

im planning to get a good CPU for both purposes. my question is how many cores video editing and gaming use, at the same time ? and im gonna render 3d objects. give me an answer like this.
EXAMPLE :

ex: Video edting: 2 cores
ex: Gaming: 4 cores

and which should i get AMD or Intel ? for Video editing and Gaming.
pls give me an accurate answer. thanks !

 

[getochkn]

most video rendering will eat up as many cores as you have. There is no way to max out 3d rendering, it will just render faster the more cores and the faster the cpu is. A lot of 3D software is going the way of GPU rendering though too and using the GPU to offload rendering on.

Gaming right now, mostly are 2-4 cores max. Not many games will touch anything over 4 cores. This may change as next gen consoles are going both be 8 core, so I think next gen PC games are going to be made to use as many cores as possible in a year or so, as they will console ports, and it will easier to port a game written for 8 cores to work with as many cores as available.

 

[MajinCry]

You would be best served by an AMD 8320/8350, in that scenario. Assign the game 1-4 cores, the rest to the other program.

 

[logainofhades]

You would be best served by an AMD 8320/8350, in that scenario. Assign the game 1-4 cores, the rest to the other program.

I agree. This is the best option for the money. You would have to look at a very expensive LGA 2011 Sandy or Ivy E solution to do significantly better.

 

[palladin9479]

The real question is how much money your willing to spend. Raw value is going to be the FX8320/8350 8 core setup, the only thing that beats it is an expensive 6 core LGA2011 rig.

Also ignore the link posted above, it's using Windows Movie Maker *Barf* and Skyrim, both programs that have horrible scaling and are biased to no ends. Teksyndicate did a post a long time ago where they streamed some games like BF3 / Crysis II / ect.. and the FX8350 won hands down.

 

[Narcissistic_Martyr]

The real question is do you turn a profit on video editing. If so invest heavily in your CPU with an i7 3930k as a minimum. If not get an fx8320 or i7 4770k.

 

[palladin9479]

That is factually incorrect and intellectually dishonest. Your already on thin ice as it is.

 

[palladin9479]

And you continue to read like a broken record. 8350 = 16 ALU's, four core 1155/1150 CPU = 12 ALU's, it's that simple for rendering. Gaming is about your GPU unless your going super high end and then we're talking about 100fps vs 120fps at 1024x768 type differences.

And thus the answer, "how much do you want to spend". Six core Intel CPU is definitely the best but is also insanely expensive on both the CPU and MB level. $160 ~200 USD CPU + $190 USD MB gets you a very high end setup for a fraction of the cost of the LGA2011 rig. The fx8350 will beat the four core i7 at rendering, that's been established for a long time already. It'll beat it if your gaming + streaming / recording your sessions for the exact same reason. Game's uses between 2~4 "cores" depending on the game while rendering will use "everything". Four core i7's will thus be between half and near full utilization on the game alone while the 8320/8350 will be at 20~40% utilization on the game and thus have more processor resources available for the rendering component.

90% of what you've been posting is bullsh!t where you cherry pick out one or two benchmarks, strip them of useful context then misrepresent them as supporting evidence for an exaggerated bad argument. Those that disagree with you are insulted or attacked, see the TS argument above. TS did a clean review on how people actually play vs sanitized benchmark environments. That means background tasks and other normal elements were present, they didn't test at 1024x768 no AA no AF ultra-low details, but at high quality details with lots of bells and whistles turned on. Their verdict was that the 8350 provides similar better overall performance then the i5 and similar performance to the i7 in the common situations gamers would find themselves in, especially anything involved with streaming.

 

[logainofhades]

The human eye cannot really see much past 60fps as an FYI. Streaming and gaming at the same time, the FX 8350 is going to be better than an i7 quad. Get off the fanboyism already. You are nothing more than a troll. Didn't you try this argument just the other day linking anandtech bench of the FX 8350 vs the 4670k? The FX won in 11 of 19 benchmarks and barely lost in some of the others. The only way an Intel rig will be better for the OP's needs is if they step up to an LGA 2011 six core i7.

 

[MajinCry]

Uh. The 8350 won 14-5 versus the i5.

I do believe Hafijur just admitted he's a troll.

 

[MajinCry]

Excuse the rather shite editing. My main computer has been out of service because my PSU went kaput, so I'm having to suffice with my laptop and Paint.

See the bench mark here for proof of validity.

 

[MajinCry]

-snip-

*Walks away, tail between legs*

 

[palladin9479]

He's been going around to different threads trying to sell Intel CPU's to folks while posting blatantly false info.

 

[jammesscot]

If you are going to purchase then you should go quad core CPUs, these are good for both purpose like video editing and gaming.