Do i need x-core for SLI gaming rig?

[karyote]

I am building a computer to attempt the impossible.

I would like to make use of my 144hz 4k gaming monitor to get at least 144 fps. I only use this machine for games.

i am looking at either an intel x-core processor or k- core processor, the k-core has higher mhz speed capping out on the 8086k, however the x-core has more pci-e lanes. I know that running Sli on k-core drops the pci-e lanes to 8,8 and that there is no difference in performance. but what if i add a m2 ssd to the mix?

which is better more lanes or faster mhz in a cpu decision for gaming. i know games dont use additional cores so cores arent important past 4. will future video cards use more bandwidth and be bottlenecked?

thanks

 

[Durvelle27]

You won’t achieve that type of FPS in games with no current GPU unless you drop visual settings. GPUs just haven’t caught up yet for proper 4K gaming.

And if you plane to go SLI/CFx while using M.2 drives than you are much better off with HEDT as you will need the additional lanes available

And ya not true that games don’t use more than 4 cores. There are a good amount of games out than can utilize over 6 cores without a hitch. More cores is where the future is heading and with current performance/price options I wouldn’t even consider under 6 cores for gaming.



You’d be looking at something like this

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/jqkMTB

 

[newtekie1]

M.2 drives on the Intel platform use the PCI-E lanes running off the chipset, not the CPU. It is like this on the mainstream and HEDT platform, both run M.2 off the chipset. Adding an M.2 drive will not affect the number of lanes the GPUs have to use.

 

[eidairaman1]

I am building a computer to attempt the impossible.

I would like to make use of my 144hz 4k gaming monitor to get at least 144 fps. I only use this machine for games.

i am looking at either an intel x-core processor or k- core processor, the k-core has higher mhz speed capping out on the 8086k, however the x-core has more pci-e lanes. I know that running Sli on k-core drops the pci-e lanes to 8,8 and that there is no difference in performance. but what if i add a m2 ssd to the mix?

which is better more lanes or faster mhz in a cpu decision for gaming. i know games dont use additional cores so cores arent important past 4. will future video cards use more bandwidth and be bottlenecked?

thanks

Depends on the motherboard you get

 

[John Naylor]

1. More cores is not going to help a gaming box. Yes, we do see some activity on some of those cores, what we have yet to see is more fps.

2. Average SLI scaling on 1080p on 10xx series cards is +18% ... on 1440p average scaling is just 34% ... only at 4k does scaling get over 50%.

3. More PCI lanes are not needed on 2 x SLI ... and 3 - 4 card SLI is history.

 

[Caring1]

You should be asking what GPU's in SLI are capable of 144FPS at 144Khz 4K.
Wait a month or two and see what Nvidia and AMD release.

 

[John Naylor]

You should be asking what GPU's in SLI are capable of 144FPS at 144Khz 4K.
Wait a month or two and see what Nvidia and AMD release.

None ... while the new AUOptronics panels bring us 144 hz at 3860p. Not seeing anything that comes close to 144 fps .. also not sure why it's a goal.... once you can maintain 70+ fps, ULMB is an option and that's good enough for me. But not totally there yet... I don't expect 11xx to reach 144 fps in 80 - 90 % of the games below, but 1180 Tis should be able to hit 70 + fps most of the time bringing ULMB goodness to most gamers. For the 1080 Ti ... - fps (% scaling)

https://i2.wp.com/babeltechreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/main-chart.jpg?w=971&ssl=1

Crysis 3 - 62 (60)
Metro LL Redux - 91 (50)
GTAV - 95 (34)
Witcher 3 - 62(13)
Fallout 4 - 60 (21)
AC Syndicate 65 (49)
Just Cause 3 - 58 (0)
Rainbow 6 - 48 (0)
Dirt Rally - 98 (37)
Far Cry primal - 86 (54)
CoD IW - 77 (0)
Watch Dogs 2 - 47 (31)
RE 7 - 63 (0)
For Honor - 96 (69)
GR Wildlands - 45 (19)
Doom Vulkan - 80 (0)
TC The Division - 46 (0)
Hitman - 77 (0)
RoTR - 104.3 (89)
AotS - 84.2 (13)
TW Warhammer - 47.2 (Varies 0 - 55)
DeusEx Mankind Divided - 38.6 (4)
Gears of War - 54 (0)
BF1 - 66 (0)
Sniper Elite 4 - 116 (42)

Results affirm that nVidia's goal seems to be to nerf SLI performance at all resolutions below 4k so as to thwart past practice of buying twin x70s instead of the much more profitable xx80 Ti. I don't see 144 fps at 3860p until at least the 12xx series.

 

[Vayra86]

1. More cores is not going to help a gaming box. Yes, we do see some activity on some of those cores, what we have yet to see is more fps.

2. Average SLI scaling on 1080p on 10xx series cards is +18% ... on 1440p average scaling is just 34% ... only at 4k does scaling get over 50%.

3. More PCI lanes are not needed on 2 x SLI ... and 3 - 4 card SLI is history.

There is *some* scaling. What's more important though is those extra cores beyond 4 help with non-gaming tasks and keep your in-game FPS intact. And its likely that now, when core counts have increased across the whole product stack for both competitors, optimization will move further towards 6 core and 8 core systems. The consoles already offer such a setup so we know this sort of heavy threading is possible. It just takes effort, one that wasn't worthwhile in the quad core environment - it was enough to optimize for quads.

People do generally build rigs for multiple years, I'd say for platform/CPU 4-5 years is easily the bottom and not the 'average' useful period of a PC. And you can rest assured that scaling on 6 and 8 cores will improve drastically now in that period of time. Beyond that? No.

As for SLI: total waste of time right now. Avoid