Quote:
Originally Posted by Katana1000S
Adding to this, some time back I read an article from a programmer about how difficult it was to make a program truly multi threaded, without going into detail you can make a one threaded program quite (in their skill levels) easily, going to two core was double the difficulty and dual threaded, but doable, after that it became extremely hard work in a sort of Universe expanding size to keep up.
I think there is a reason Intel have stayed at 4 cores for now (apart from the 6 core XEONS for a select small market) They know the market and knew AMD could not pull this off, even their projected market of Ivy Bridge will stretch to 6 cores as a max for 2012 as well.
AMD going for the first 8 core joe smuchk CPU dirt cheap seems like a bad idea in the long run ... IMHO.
Small steps AMD, not big lunges.
|
it greatly depends on the kind of game and graphics needed.
For a game like IL2, a multithreaded/multicore approach is easily doable, as it is mainly about computing CEM, Physics and AI for a multitude of objects from game's world.
Have 4 cores? just divide the number of AI planes on three (to leave a core dedicated to main game's thread, and player's plane CEM/Pshysics computations needed), and compute each bunch on it's own core (with each airplane having it's own thread on the core doing its bunch of airplanes). And divide all render threads on all 4 cores.