Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Will Future PC Games use Quad Xeon?

Tangerine

Tangerine

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 5, 2007
182
0
I fear for the future of my Mac Pro in the Gaming rigs, a lot of PC Games now doesn't take full advantage of the Quad Xeons in the Mac Pro. Instead it's only using 1 of the CPU, which sucks really bad because now a powerful machine is incapable of unleashing it full potential. I know Apple is not built for Gaming, but evident show that Apple is trying to capture more users and make PC switch by adding powerful Graphic Card for Gaming, such as the ATI X1900XT. However, with the new Intel Chip Intel Duo 2 Core Processors, almost every games will use the Intel Duo 2 Core Processors and take full advantage of it, while Intel Quad Xeon is left behind and only using 1 Core of it CPU. While I am empress with the Mac Pro when I benchmark it with 3DMark 07, Apple indeed have come a long way and have vastly improve greatly over the years. However, I think Apple still failed when they choose Intel Xeon for their Computer. I would be all over and would love to have a Intel Duo 2 Core Processor Mac Pro, and no I do not want an iMac because it's not very upgradible, making it sucks. Most game right now I notice lag and slow down because it only using 1 Core, it's like having a Pentium 4 2.6ghz.
 
Well, it's not due to Apple that games don't use multiple cores. It's the programming from the game developers. But there has been word a couple of months back that game developers are going to make use of multiple cores. Offcourse they are going to do it because a duocore chip is widely available and used by the windhell community now. You should be thinking of 1 or 2 cores are being used for the graphics, a second or third core for the audio.
 
So games can use multiple Core 2 cores but cant use multiple Xeon cores, how come. Wouldn't have thought that a game would discriminate and that the OS handle these matters anyway.
 
What about Intel Duo 2 Core Processor? People having this system have no hiccup in games meaning it's using all the cpu cores?
 
miniConvert said:
Xeon is just a server class, multiple-processor-certified, Core 2 Duo processor... if a game can use two cores on a standard Core 2 Duo then surely it can also use 2 cores on a modern Xeon.
Click to expand...

But it doesn't, I barely see any games that use the 2 core on the Xeon. Seam like Intel Duo 2 Core Processor have win the competition in gamings, I'm sure developer will continues to make games that take full advantage of the Duo 2 Core Processor. Sadly, it look like Xeon is more of a server, business computer.
 
Tangerine said:
But it doesn't, I barely see any games that use the 2 core on the Xeon. Seam like Intel Duo 2 Core Processor have win the competition in gamings, I'm sure developer will continues to make games that take full advantage of the Duo 2 Core Processor. Sadly, it look like Xeon is more of a server, business computer.
Click to expand...

HAve you played these games or is it from reading the specs, because what Miniconvert and I are saying that if it works on a core 2 then it should work on a Xeon, but if you have experience showing otherwise then I really can't see why the game makers would implement such a strategy or how they would.
 
So if a game that use all the processor such as the Intel Duo 2 Core Processor, then it work the same way on the Xeon? Funny how my friends Intel Duo 2 Core Processor have better FPS then mine.
 
Tangerine said:
So if a game that use all the processor such as the Intel Duo 2 Core Processor, then it work the same way on the Xeon? Funny how my friends Intel Duo 2 Core Processor have better FPS then mine.
Click to expand...

I was just asking if you have actual experience and I see no reason why this would be the case.

You basing this just on fps or have you seen the processor usage in activity monitor or task manager? Is your graphics card the same/better/worse than theirs? Exactly the same situations?
 
Tangerine said:
So if a game that use all the processor such as the Intel Duo 2 Core Processor, then it work the same way on the Xeon? Funny how my friends Intel Duo 2 Core Processor have better FPS then mine.
Click to expand...

there are more contributing factors to fps than just the CPU.

thats like asking... why one ford taurus is faster than the other?
2000_Ford_TaurusNASCAR_expick.jpg
 
If for some reason, the developers needed to code seperately for Core 2 Duos than the Xeons, I, as a developer, wouldn't bother... why would I go all out to write code for a game on something meant to be a server? That being said, I don't know how many gamers buy systems with Xeons, either...

Personally, I think the multiple core thing would be handled by the O/S...
 
Tangerine said:
So if a game that use all the processor such as the Intel Duo 2 Core Processor, then it work the same way on the Xeon? Funny how my friends Intel Duo 2 Core Processor have better FPS then mine.
Click to expand...

The Mac Pro uses FB-DIMM RAM which is a higher latency RAM than systems that use the Core 2 Duo processor. FB stands for Fully Buffered so all the information stored in the RAM is actually buffered which slows down the access time to the RAM. It does have its benifits though so it is not all bad.

You are getting confused between dual core compatible games and CPUs. If a game is programmed to take advantage of multi core systems it does not matter what Intel or AMD CPU it is using as long as it is a multi core system it will take advantage of the extra cores.

The Mac Pro is NOT a gaming computer and is actually worse in terms of performance to a proper gaming rig designed for pure speed. The advantage of a Mac Pro come in when it is used for professional level applications that require stability and RAM integrity (this is where the advantage of having FB-DIMM RAM come in as well as having ECC RAM).
 
Aren't Dell, etc, also using Xeon class quad-core processors in XPS gaming rigs and Alienware setups and the like? It seems off to me also that there ought to be any reason for multiple core functionality in one Core processor and not in another. That's not just inefficient for games... it's also very inefficient for "pro" apps and server apps -- a pure Xeon or non-Xeon environment can't / shouldn't have to be planned for in those worlds in order to get performance. Not every single blade or server runs off of Xeons. And pro apps are expected to run on desktops and notebooks (which don't use Xeons).

So, I take it that it just doesn't exist, but no one here actually has any benchmark evidence that lends credence to the idea the less cores are utilized in a way that leads to a performance loss on computers and tasks that are comparable except for the use of Xeon vs. non-Xeon?
 
mkrishnan said:
Aren't Dell, etc, also using Xeon class quad-core processors in XPS gaming rigs and Alienware setups and the like? It seems off to me also that there ought to be any reason for multiple core functionality in one Core processor and not in another.
Click to expand...

As I have said, applications do not distinguish between processors. It either uses multi core systems or it does not.

Some applications will take advantage of features found in only certain CPUs (for instance SSE3) but if it is a multi threaded application it will take advantage of all cores regardless of the CPU type.

mkrishnan said:
That's not just inefficient for games... it's also very inefficient for "pro" apps and server apps -- a pure Xeon or non-Xeon environment can't / shouldn't have to be planned for in those worlds in order to get performance. Not every single blade or server runs off of Xeons. And pro apps are expected to run on desktops and notebooks (which don't use Xeons).

So, I take it that it just doesn't exist, but no one here actually has any benchmark evidence that lends credence to the idea the less cores are utilized in a way that leads to a performance loss on computers and tasks that are comparable except for the use of Xeon vs. non-Xeon?
Click to expand...

As I have already stated this is not an issue. The only difference in speed is going to be down to architecture and not down to whether a program takes advantage of multi core systems because as I have said if a program is designed for multi core systems it will take advantage of the cores regardless of what CPU it is running on.
 
I think 2 cores will always be highly competitive just due to the nature of gaming in general.

Another GPU may help with things, but Dual CPUs should be enough.

I just don't see Quad processors offering any significant advantage over dual in gaming. Games just plain cannot utilize that many threads at one time--they don't need to.

Tediously manipulating the code to diverge into and then converge threads doesn't always make the application faster. Sometimes things just need to be done one after another, and not at the same time. This is especially true with gaming.
 
Tangerine said:
What about Intel Duo 2 Core Processor? People having this system have no hiccup in games meaning it's using all the cpu cores?
Click to expand...


You're confused; an Xeon is just a high-end Core 2 Duo. You having a Quad Xeon means that your computer will ALWAYS outperform a regular Core 2 Duo; you basically have two of them.

A Core 2 Duo will NEVER outperform your dual dual-Xeon machine with equivilant specs. Ever.

The FPS difference comes from the graphics card. If your friends with a Core 2 Duo and he gets better gaming performance, he probably has a better graphics card (Geforce 8800 anyone?).
 
Tangerine said:
However, with the new Intel Chip Intel Duo 2 Core Processors, almost every games will use the Intel Duo 2 Core Processors and take full advantage of it
Click to expand...

Sadly this is not true. So far, hardly any games use more than 1 core. Quake 4 is about it, really, to make any real use of more than 1 core in the game itself. UT2004 offloads sound onto another CPU/core for a small gain. WoW uses multi-threaded OpenGL on Intel systems, and is so far the only game I know of that does. Presumably more will do so once Leopard comes out and MT OpenGL is "official", which will benefit all multi-core/CPU systems, including G5s (assuming PPC versions of any multi-threaded OpenGL games are made). You don't write threads for specific CPUs.

--Eric
 
Crap, he just told me his PC Spec and it's use SLI which totally blow my Mac Pro away in Gaming.

His spec:


Processor: Intel® Core 2 Duo Processor E6600 2.4GHz
Motherboard: EVGA NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI 775 A1
Memory: Corsair DOMINATOR DDR2 TWIN2X2048-8500C5DF
Video Chip:EVGA NVIDIA e-GeForce 8800GTX 768MB


Then he go on and diss Xeon Processor :rolleyes: , the way Xeon handle "threads" are not same same as Pentium 4, Pentium D, or Core 2 Duo, thus they are better then Xeon even if you have 2 Dual-Core Xeon.

Go look at a few benchmarks result, you can clearly see that a Core 2 Duo CPU at 2.4GHz easily beat Pentium D(Dual Core) 3.2GHz CPU. so basically you cant compare my machine's 2.4 to your Xeon, because they are different technology. my machine > your for gamming, your machine > 2 x my machine for server. Xeon are made for business and server, it never build for Gaming. A Pentium D and Duo 2 Core will beat your Xeon even your is Quad Xeon.


Does everyone agree with what he said? He said a Pentium D and Duo 2 Core will beat the Xeon? Sadly, this look like it's true. Even though the Mac Pro use Quad Xeon, Intel Duo 2 Core beat it even though it have less core CPU because it thread faster and optimize more for games result in faster fps in games. I wonder if we ever going to see a Nvidia 8800 in the Mac Pro. *DROOOL* Oh well, I can only DREAM.
 

Read the threads above.

Tangerine said:
Go look at a few benchmarks result, you can clearly see that a Core 2 Duo CPU at 2.4GHz easily beat Pentium D(Dual Core) 3.2GHz CPU. so basically you cant compare my machine's 2.4 to your Xeon, because they are different technology.
Click to expand...

Flawed logic, because my CPU is better than another technology CPU means your CPU can't be compared because it is different technology.

The main difference is the use of SLI this provides quite a large bump in the graphics department which in turns produces the main difference in fps.

You still haven't told us your rig.

The Xeon will perform just as well as the Core 2 Duo if not better because it has more room to handle other things in the background and will be a lot better further down the line when games can handle 4 cores or 8 depending on you Mac Pro.
 
Tangerine said:
Then he go on and diss Xeon Processor :rolleyes: , the way Xeon handle "threads" are not same same as Pentium 4, Pentium D, or Core 2 Duo, thus they are better then Xeon even if you have 2 Dual-Core Xeon.
Click to expand...

Lets see how different a Xeon is, how about we compare an E6600 processor your friend has to lets say a Xeon 3060 (yes I know the Mac's don't use them)... These processors are identical, the Xeon's are just re-badged.

Now that said the Xeon 5100 series used in the Mac Pro's is a bit different, however it is still just a Core 2 processor, that also support multi processor environments. The ones used in the Mac Pro's also have a faster front side bus compared with the Core 2 processors (some of the lower range X5100 series have a 1033MHz FSB).

The performance difference comes from the graphics card(s) and also the chipset and fully buffered RAM for the Xeons, which slows it down a bit for games.
 
You still haven't told us your rig.
Click to expand...


Mac Pro
2.6Ghz Quad Xeons
ATI X1900XT Overclock to 655/774
2GB Ram

That as far as I can push it, and I agree if the Mac Pro can use any PC Graphic Card it boost the performance tremendously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back