CPU Reviews 720p/1080p/4K or 1080p/1440p/4K?

[alucasa]

That's what you get for living submerged in LN2. Welcome to the warm reality.

 

[64K]

Had I known less people understood a 1080 or greater isnt holding anything back at 1080p, i would have said that a lot earlier...

True for the most part but not for everyone. Some people have 120 Hz or 144 Hz monitors and not by accident. They want 120 FPS if they can get it somehow. If you take a look at the 1080 review here you will find that a GTX 1080 at 1080p isn't enough for them in 7 out of the 16 games in the test suite. They are the ones wondering if paying a lot more for a 1080 Ti would be worth it for what they want and a good way to tell that is if the FPS goes up considerably at 720p. But they are in the minority and benches shouldn't be geared towards the minority as the results of this poll show.

 

[Vayra86]

Had I known less people understood a 1080 or greater isnt holding anything back at 1080p, i would have said that a lot earlier...

Games used are critical, however, i would only say having one or two of each genre is most important. Mmos and rpgs typically need more cpu than fps...so it eill behave differently for each. You cant extrapolate performance outside of each game's results anyway, but gives a bigger picture to form a conclusion from.

You'll agree with me when I say that most reviewers are very single-minded in covering only that eternal first/third person game suite and very little else because that is 'popular' when in fact its just being a sheep and following whatever EA Ubisoft or Activision released most recently... Civlization ofcourse does happen, but nobody dares burn himself on MMO's and if they do, its totally not representative for real world (they do a fixed run in some random area, but never in a big population hub).

And when they ever, if ever, touch on RTS or 4X, they pick Ashes of all games

BTW just to make it clear, the one thing I really like about TPU reviews is the wide selection of games.

@Dethroy >> below>> spoken like a true politician. I say go for it

 

[Dethroy]

Option C: 720p/1080p/1440p

 

[alucasa]

I'd wager that 720p has a lot more users than 4k. I say we remove 4k benchmark.

Edit:

 

[64K]

I'd wager that 720p has a lot more users than 4k. I say we remove 4k benchmark.

I would say remove 4k benches from a CPU review because it's pointless. The GPU is what is holding the FPS back in almost all games at 4k and not the CPU but I would still want to see 4k benches in the GPU reviews since I plan to go 4k when Volta drops.

 

[alucasa]

That much, I agree.

Let's add 8k instead. If a GPU can't get 144 fps in 8k, they get trashed.

 

[EarthDog]

Relative maximum performance, maximum achievable FPS.

It answers questions such as:
- how many FPS could I win by upgrading compared to my last CPU, regardless of GPU (could be integrated for all we know)
- it allows you to mirror with results from way way back
- is it useful to even buy a 240hz panel
- can I hit 120 fps reliably with CPU XYZ
- What is the difference of gaming @ 720p old system versus 1080p new system (not everybody, including TPU visitors, is rich)

And most importantly: Can it run Crysis? (I kid you not, Crysis 3 might prove surprising @ 720p)

Suffice to say there are many arguments to make for 720p, it would do people well to think about this in the scope of a wide range of readers, not just your own (enthusiast) situation.

But CPU doesn't matter as much when going up in res...

- 720p testing won't tell you that...
- So what? (not being an arse, I don't understand that relevance)
- That's more GPU than CPU, even at 1080p, more so at higher res
- At 1080p that is going to be most any modern from SB/IB and Ryzen on forward
- If you are testing at 720p, then would it tell you at 1080p? 2560x1440? 4k UHD? (Nothing, right?!)
- LOL Crysis3 and CPU.. is it really CPU heavy? Ive never tried...

Thanks for the effort in helping me understand your angle.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

All games have a threshold where they transition from CPU bottleneck to GPU bottleneck. If the transition happens at 1280x720, you're likely seeing 150+ fps anyway (especially with a GTX 1080) which means even a pathetic Celeron can handle it. With Ryzen versus Core i7, the CPU bottleneck usually ended around 2560x1440. Usually by 3840x2160, the bottlenecks are gone on the high end processors which really separates the CPUs down the line.

So, basically, if you're going to buy a CPU to play a specific game, you should look for the highest resolution where they flat line then drop down a resolution from there. For example, if it appears in a flat line at 3840x2160, look at 2560x1440 and it will definitively tell you what processor is the absolute best for playing that game even if you don't play at that resolution.

I'd wager that 720p has a lot more users than 4k. I say we remove 4k benchmark.

Edit:
View attachment 87727

Those are overwhelmingly cheap laptops where gaming is an afterthought (or has a GeForce so it must be a gaming laptop right?). Those buyers aren't going to come to TPU looking for information about CPUs before buying.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I would say remove 4k benches from a CPU review because it's pointless. The GPU is what is holding the FPS back in almost all games at 4k and not the CPU but I would still want to see 4k benches in the GPU reviews since I plan to go 4k when Volta drops.

I heartily dissagree, I game at 4k and 1440p and I couldn't care less what my gpus would do at 720p oe my cpu ,how would you see the results ,,, y you would have to scroll.
And all those arguing for esports high fps wtf
A serious gamer would get an adequate rig for that use and today high fps is not dear ,it certainly is not gtx1080 territory ,shit a 1060 would do it so moot point to me.
Its also argued to Not prove future performance ,via amds performance progress through time ,not panning out as was suggested by launch reviews.
The use of 4k is on the up 720 nah mate.
And also looking at Cpu benches convinced me to stick with my rig since its not far behind any present cpu at 4k saving me a G in all today ,thats real value and advice derived from testing.

Bench with relevance to your consumers

 

[alucasa]

720p and 1080p cover roughly 70% of gamers according to Steam hardware survey.

720p has around 24% (including 1366 768, the laptop screen resolution). Anything over 1080p has painfully low adaptation.

A game review should cover what people use the most. Therefore, instead of 720p, I say we add 1366 x 768 instead.

Keep 4k for kicks and remove 1440p.

But that's for GPU review, not for CPU.

For CPU, just run Cinebench and be done with it, lolz.

 

[Kyuuba]

1080p and greater man, i think it's best option.

 

[EarthDog]

I'd wager that 720p has a lot more users than 4k. I say we remove 4k benchmark.

720p and 1080p cover roughly 70% of gamers according to Steam hardware survey.

720p has around 24% (including 1366 768, the laptop screen resolution). Anything over 1080p has painfully low adaptation.

A game review should cover what people use the most. Therefore, instead of 720p, I say we add 1366 x 768 instead.

Keep 4k for kicks and remove 1440p.

But that's for GPU review, not for CPU.

For CPU, just run Cinebench and be done with it, lolz.

Edit:

That was never in question... the point is though, how many of those people run an wholly unbalanced system and pop a 1080 or greater there while still running a monitor from Y2K?

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

720p and 1080p cover roughly 70% of gamers according to Steam hardware survey.

720p has around 24% (including 1366 768, the laptop screen resolution). Anything over 1080p has painfully low adaptation.

A game review should cover what people use the most. Therefore, instead of 720p, I say we add 1366 x 768 instead.

Keep 4k for kicks and remove 1440p.

But that's for GPU review, not for CPU.

For CPU, just run Cinebench and be done with it, lolz.

There you have it ,all those are laptops, that market isn't looking for the most powerful cpu to game on , bejewelled isn't challenging.

 

[alucasa]

That was never in question... the point is though, how many of those people run an wholly unbalanced system and pop a 1080 or greater there while still running a monitor from Y2K?

Realistically speaking, those who play on 1366 x 768 aren't likely even going to visit TPU. They live in their own world.

And only those who play 1080p and higher are likely going to visit TPU or any similar sites.

Okay, fine, let's keep 1080p and 1440p and 8k. Remove 4k. It's utterly pointless.

I am losing it, baby.

There you have it ,all those are laptops, that market isn't looking for the most powerful cpu to game on , bejewelled isn't challenging.

Me plays Sins of a Solar empire on Intel HD on the road.
Intel HD also plays This war of mine perfectly fine as well as Crusader Kings.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

8K is going to be 100% GPU bottleneck. CPU really isn't going to matter, therefore, there's really no point in even doing it.

 

[64K]

Realistically speaking, those who play on 1366 x 768 aren't likely even going to visit TPU. They live in their own world.

And only those who play 1080p and higher are likely going to visit TPU or any similar sites.

Okay, fine, let's keep 1080p and 1440p and 8k. Remove 4k. It's utterly pointless.

I am losing it, baby.

You're going to be too old for wearing mini skirts before you see people gaming on a 144 Hz 8k monitor.

 

[alucasa]

You're going to be too old for wearing mini skirts before you see people gaming on a 144 Hz 8k monitor.

By time 8k has a higher-end single digit market share, I am sure 16k will come along merrily.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Realistically speaking, those who play on 1366 x 768 aren't likely even going to visit TPU. They live in their own world.

And only those who play 1080p and higher are likely going to visit TPU or any similar sites.

Okay, fine, let's keep 1080p and 1440p and 8k. Remove 4k. It's utterly pointless.

I am losing it, baby.



Me plays Sins of a Solar empire on Intel HD on the road.
Intel HD also plays This war of mine perfectly fine as well as Crusader Kings.

So cut the shit then , when you bought it was high fps gaming on your shopping list or just casual gaming and some work stuff like the other 98% of the laptop owning fraternity , so very few of which even know what a cpu is.

 

[dir_d]

People that play at 1366 x 768 are most likely laptop users. What use is a CPU review which is not intended on the platform they play on. 1080P up is the way to go.

 

[alucasa]

So cut the shit then , when you bought it was high fps gaming on your shopping list or just casual gaming and some work stuff like the other 98% of the laptop owning fraternity , so very few of which even know what a cpu is.

In another sense of realism, just ignoring the silent majority comes off arrogant to me. Just because they are silent, it doesn't mean they don't have feelings.

... What am I saying anyway?

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

In another sense of realism, just ignoring the silent majority comes off arrogant to me. Just because they are silent, it doesn't mean they don't have feelings.

... What am I saying anyway?

Good question dodge but for cpu reviews I don't give a shit about anyone's feelings, just so you know.

 

[EarthDog]

What is anyone saying...

... lift up your skirt.

that is all.

 

[alucasa]

Good question dodge but for cpu reviews I don't give a shit about anyone's feelings, just so you know.

Everyone knows I talk crap. Nevermind me.

Just you wait, the silent majority will one day rise their claws.

P.S. We need to ban W1zzard.

 

[64K]

I think some people are thinking more about GPU reviews than CPU reviews. There is good reason for why no one benches on 720p for a long time now in GPU reviews. But I still ask this question. If you see a game being benched on a CPU review at 85 FPS at 1080p and you want something closer to 120 FPS then how do you know whether the CPU isn't able to feed the GPU any more frames because it's maxxed out and you will need a faster CPU if you don't bench said CPU at a lower resolution to find out for certain?

Of course hardly anyone games at less than 1080p anymore except on laptops where you can't upgrade the CPU or GPU anyway so reading a CPU review would be irrelevant for a laptop.