Question How many CPU cores needed?

[Ksingh707]

Hello,

How can I determine the appropriate number of CPU cores needed for various tasks and applications ranging from servers and normal desktops. I would like to understand how CPU core count impacts performance and resource allocation for different activities. Please provide guidance on the following:

1. Basic tasks: What is the recommended number of CPU cores for everyday activities like web browsing, email, and document editing?
2. Multimedia consumption: How many CPU cores are typically required for smooth playback of high-definition videos, streaming content, and audio playback?
3. Office productivity: In terms of using office productivity software like word processing, spreadsheets, and presentations, what is the ideal number of CPU cores for efficient performance?
4. Content creation: For tasks such as graphic design, photo editing, and video editing, how do CPU cores affect rendering times and overall productivity?
5. Virtualization: When running virtual machines or using virtualization software, how does the number of CPU cores impact the ability to allocate resources and handle multiple instances effectively?
6. Gaming: What is the general guideline for selecting the appropriate number of CPU cores for gaming, taking into consideration the demands of modern game titles and potential multitasking scenarios?
7. Data analysis and simulations: When performing data analysis or running simulations for scientific or engineering purposes, how do CPU cores influence processing speed and computational efficiency?

Additionally, are there any tools, benchmarks, or resources available to assist in evaluating CPU core requirements for specific tasks and applications?

 

[kanewolf]

Hello,

How can I determine the appropriate number of CPU cores needed for various tasks and applications ranging from servers and normal desktops. I would like to understand how CPU core count impacts performance and resource allocation for different activities. Please provide guidance on the following:

1. Basic tasks: What is the recommended number of CPU cores for everyday activities like web browsing, email, and document editing?
2. Multimedia consumption: How many CPU cores are typically required for smooth playback of high-definition videos, streaming content, and audio playback?
3. Office productivity: In terms of using office productivity software like word processing, spreadsheets, and presentations, what is the ideal number of CPU cores for efficient performance?
4. Content creation: For tasks such as graphic design, photo editing, and video editing, how do CPU cores affect rendering times and overall productivity?
5. Virtualization: When running virtual machines or using virtualization software, how does the number of CPU cores impact the ability to allocate resources and handle multiple instances effectively?
6. Gaming: What is the general guideline for selecting the appropriate number of CPU cores for gaming, taking into consideration the demands of modern game titles and potential multitasking scenarios?
7. Data analysis and simulations: When performing data analysis or running simulations for scientific or engineering purposes, how do CPU cores influence processing speed and computational efficiency?

Additionally, are there any tools, benchmarks, or resources available to assist in evaluating CPU core requirements for specific tasks and applications?

I appreciate your guidance in helping me determine the optimal number of CPU cores for different activities and ensuring efficient performance. Thank you."

I would say 1, 2, 3 are all 4 cores.
4 depends on the task.
5 more dependent on RAM than cores. Generally 2 - 4 virtual cores per VM. Physical cores can be over subscribed 1.5 to 2X
6 depends on the game, but generally 6 or more performance cores.
7 limited by budget.

 

[hotaru.hino]

While I'll answer the questions, keep in mind this only applies to hardware that's within 2-3 years of the time of this post. Core count is only part of the equation, as a quad core from 2006 (yes those existed) is nowhere near as performant as a dual core from today.

Basic tasks: What is the recommended number of CPU cores for everyday activities like web browsing, email, and document editing?

Two at the minimum

Multimedia consumption: How many CPU cores are typically required for smooth playback of high-definition videos, streaming content, and audio playback?

None, because video playback is handled by the GPU these days.

Office productivity: In terms of using office productivity software like word processing, spreadsheets, and presentations, what is the ideal number of CPU cores for efficient performance?

Depending on how big these documents are, anywhere from 2-4 is fine.

Content creation: For tasks such as graphic design, photo editing, and video editing, how do CPU cores affect rendering times and overall productivity?

The more cores you have, the faster the work can be done. Though it depends on what you're doing. If you're doing touch-ups on photos, I'd argue you don't really need a lot of cores. Just a lot of RAM. But if you're doing something like a script to run through the same thing on a batch of photos, then having more cores will help.

Having more cores for video editing will be better overall.

Virtualization: When running virtual machines or using virtualization software, how does the number of CPU cores impact the ability to allocate resources and handle multiple instances effectively?

Depends on what you're providing to the VMs and how many VMs you want.

Gaming: What is the general guideline for selecting the appropriate number of CPU cores for gaming, taking into consideration the demands of modern game titles and potential multitasking scenarios?

There isn't any, but a key takeaway is that most games don't scale in performance much past 4-6 cores. Games favor higher single threaded performance over more cores.

Data analysis and simulations: When performing data analysis or running simulations for scientific or engineering purposes, how do CPU cores influence processing speed and computational efficiency?

If the data can be processed in chunks and the algorithm is such that the current calculation doesn't rely on the results of another, then the more CPU cores you can throw at it, the better.

Additionally, are there any tools, benchmarks, or resources available to assist in evaluating CPU core requirements for specific tasks and applications?

There isn't really anything outside of just benchmarking the hardware. The thing is, core count without considering any other spec is meaningless. You have to factor in the clock speed and instructions-per-clock performance. As I mentioned, a quad core in 2006 is going to get destroyed in performance by a dual-core of today, simply because modern processors are better at processing instructions.

 

[Math Geek]

just browsing the web only needs 1 core. a movie the same 1 core. many programs only use 1 core at a time, or actually only a single thread which won't even tax a single core.

so why do we need 6,8,10 or more cores?

if you want to run 6 programs at once that each needs 1 core. that's 6 cores of work at one time.

a game that needs 4 cores with discord and youtube running in the background?? 6 cores or possibly more.

and so on and so on. the answer is it depends on how you use your pc. you have to do some math and add up what you could ask the pc to do all at once. then make sure you have the minimum resources available.

ram is the same way. a game may need 16 gb, but windows uses 4 or more gb and whatever else you are running. so you may need 32 gb or more depending on what you use at once.

VM's are the same as well. one vm is obviously easier than running 6 at a time.

basically, run a worse case scenario of you going nuts all at once. figure out what that needs and make sure you have that. you may not use it all regularly, but it's good to have it all when you actually do need to run 30 things at one time

i run a lot of vm's and virtual networks and so on. so i went with a 5900x (12 cores/24 threads) and 64 gb ram so i could make sure all those vm's had what they needed when run all at once. nothing else i do needs that much for sure, but when i get to making my little virtual worlds, i find i could actually use a few more cores which only leaves a 5950x for me to move to. lol

 

[USAFRet]

Hello,

How can I determine the appropriate number of CPU cores needed for various tasks and applications ranging from servers and normal desktops. I would like to understand how CPU core count impacts performance and resource allocation for different activities. Please provide guidance on the following:

1. Basic tasks: What is the recommended number of CPU cores for everyday activities like web browsing, email, and document editing?
2. Multimedia consumption: How many CPU cores are typically required for smooth playback of high-definition videos, streaming content, and audio playback?
3. Office productivity: In terms of using office productivity software like word processing, spreadsheets, and presentations, what is the ideal number of CPU cores for efficient performance?
4. Content creation: For tasks such as graphic design, photo editing, and video editing, how do CPU cores affect rendering times and overall productivity?
5. Virtualization: When running virtual machines or using virtualization software, how does the number of CPU cores impact the ability to allocate resources and handle multiple instances effectively?
6. Gaming: What is the general guideline for selecting the appropriate number of CPU cores for gaming, taking into consideration the demands of modern game titles and potential multitasking scenarios?
7. Data analysis and simulations: When performing data analysis or running simulations for scientific or engineering purposes, how do CPU cores influence processing speed and computational efficiency?

Additionally, are there any tools, benchmarks, or resources available to assist in evaluating CPU core requirements for specific tasks and applications?

I appreciate your guidance in helping me determine the optimal number of CPU cores for different activities and ensuring efficient performance. Thank you."

Build or buy to a budget and performance expectation/, not some number of ores.

 

[Deleted member 2838871]

For me it boiled down to wanting maximum performance in a mix of gaming and productivity workloads... which is why I chose the 16 core 7950x3D over the 8 core 7800x3D.

The latter is the "best" gaming CPU... but lags behind in productivity. I've seen fps charts and the "best" has a whopping 2-3 fps lead over mine... but when I'm already capping max 4K fps what do I care about losing a couple fps that I don't even need?

I like being able to game while having stream/recording software going while having a movie playing in the background while using Handbrake to encode a video file and not even caring that I forgot to close FireFox that had 30 browser tabs open.

PC still doesn't break a sweat.

 

[geofelt]

Many good answers here.
How to determine how many cores are useful for your workload??
Run the workload and then run it again by taking one core away.
See how it impacts you.
Today, marketing pushes many cores(think threads).
That is because it is easier to produce a many core processor than it is to significantly speed one up.
I think the single thread performance is an under rated factor for most workloads.
To see the impact of single thred performance, look at "amdahl's law"

Amdahl's law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Deleted member 2838871]

Many good answers here.
How to determine how many cores are useful for your workload??

The best comparison I can make is encoding video which I do a lot of. I distinctly remember my 4 core 7700k taking 90+ minutes to encode a 2 hour movie file.

10900k did it a little better... done in half the time.

7950x3D does it in minutes.

 

[Karadjgne]

1, 2,3 = quad core, none of that programming requires more, doesn't use it, no benefit with # of cores only IPC and speed of cores.

All the rest are program specific, not general. If encoding using nvenc, you could easily use a Pentium class cpu, if encoding through OBS, then that's almost ways cpu bound, so the more cores = more work done.

Same applies to gaming, a die-hard fan of CSGO or LoL can run their game on a Pentium class cpu all day long, doesn't require more cores. Jump into open world games with high server drops like WoW or Warships etc, then higher core count = less lag and generally higher fps.

Can't really define a # of cores for broad general fields because different software is written differently and has different requirements, bonuses, recommendations etc.

But at the end of the day, it's better to have and not need, than to need and not have.

 

[TerryLaze]

All the rest are program specific, not general. If encoding using nvenc, you could easily use a Pentium class cpu, if encoding through OBS, then that's almost ways cpu bound, so the more cores = more work done.

If you have a pentium you can use quicksync from the iGPU which is at least as good as nvenc, also OBS can use nvenc/quicksync as well.

 

[Ksingh707]

While I'll answer the questions, keep in mind this only applies to hardware that's within 2-3 years of the time of this post. Core count is only part of the equation, as a quad core from 2006 (yes those existed) is nowhere near as performant as a dual core from today.


Two at the minimum


None, because video playback is handled by the GPU these days.


Depending on how big these documents are, anywhere from 2-4 is fine.


The more cores you have, the faster the work can be done. Though it depends on what you're doing. If you're doing touch-ups on photos, I'd argue you don't really need a lot of cores. Just a lot of RAM. But if you're doing something like a script to run through the same thing on a batch of photos, then having more cores will help.

Having more cores for video editing will be better overall.


Depends on what you're providing to the VMs and how many VMs you want.


There isn't any, but a key takeaway is that most games don't scale in performance much past 4-6 cores. Games favor higher single threaded performance over more cores.


If the data can be processed in chunks and the algorithm is such that the current calculation doesn't rely on the results of another, then the more CPU cores you can throw at it, the better.


There isn't really anything outside of just benchmarking the hardware. The thing is, core count without considering any other spec is meaningless. You have to factor in the clock speed and instructions-per-clock performance. As I mentioned, a quad core in 2006 is going to get destroyed in performance by a dual-core of today, simply because modern processors are better at processing instructions.

Thank you, you made it very easy to understand the concept. Thanks for the additional info as well.