like really why?

like anyone care what the CPU do when you playing tomb raider or some other shit GPU game.

People that really care about CPU (when it comes to gaming)
Turn based games.

just to name a few

civilization
Dominion 5
Warhammer Games for CA
Might and magic

here a few examples
I have a Ryzen 7 3800X (it's already heavy duty CPU and look those time wasted by turns)
Dominions takes my computer 1,5 min a turn
Warhammer II takes around 35 seconds (in mortal empire) a turn
Might and magic VI takes around 30 seconds a turn

See people that play turn based games CARE about CPU it's a lot of time wasted doing nothing
present CPU to people that needs them not some fool that play counterstrike or some other shity flashy game

What are you on about?

I think they want the gamecard to have performance metrics slapped onto it. While not realizing that maybe some games just never are going to run good because they use a single core.

those techies showing their new CPU toy's while not showing the befit for people that that need CPU power
for example Linus tech tips

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EogHCFd7w0

one game (shows results for CPU depanding games)
rest flashy GPU demanding games

if people review a product they should review it for people that befit from it. no i don't have issues and the ryzen performance say you play WH (a turn takes you around 35 seconds)
then Intel comes with a new CPU that takes only 20 seconds a turn *that's a big diference for people playing those games*

they care to know if that new shiny CPU is better or not if the new cpu is only 1 second faster then say CPU they have it's a no go

that's why people watch reviews of products right?.

I agree with you totally 100%. We don't need the CPU (the Central Processing Unit) to be powerful at all to play 3D games! We really only need only to have a 6502 processor (or say a 3Mhz CPU) to do all logic and processing and give orders to the GPU for the graphics.

It's not like there's potentially hundreds of thousands of moving parts, different AI's, memory and sorting and calculations at all, because the GPU that does 3D calculations for graphics also uses all it's cores also for game processing. As long as your GPU is fast you don't need a CPU at all!

/sarcasm

Lot to process here.

I vaguely understand your objections, but I have a newsflash for you.

It all depends what you're aiming for and how you do your gaming. Looking for high framerate 1080p gaming? CPU is definitely going to be the bottleneck there, not the GPU.

That being said the CPU is (still) not that relevant for gaming workloads if all you want is 1080p/1440p/4K 60fps. I do all my gaming on a non-K i7-7700 and I've yet to run across a game where it is a problem. Sure, I will wait 5 extra seconds per turn in Civ 5, but rather than go out and splurge on a 5950X, you know what, I think I'll just be patient :P. Looks like someone has a slow CPU :P.

Right...

watch and learn only 10% of CPU being used have 2 games open WH2 and Mechwarrior 5
could have rendered on the background for all the CPU cares.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2650385819


GPU games dont need CPU that much
o yea both games running 4K ofcourse

Yes, because as you correctly say those are "GPU games". They're not CPU intensive. And I also agree with your assessment that a large majority of games will be GPU intensive and won't care that much about the CPU.

If you'd have tried Anno 1800 though, you'd see a different story, but I still don't expect you'd get anywhere near even 50% CPU utilization.

Beefy CPUs are hardly needed these days even for streaming setups, since you can rely on NVENC for hardware encoding.

You can't say however that a CPU "doesn't matter" for gaming, because then you've obviously never tried to game on a low-end Celeron. It "doesn't matter" in the sense that you don't necessarily need top tier CPUs, but you still need something fairly decent. I'm not sure you really know how a 3D game engine works from what you're saying... the CPU is used for game logic and is not a factor in detail/rendering distance, graphical effects or anything 3D really. AI, yes - it's always been a CPU thing for as long as strategy games (and not only) have existed. The actual "problem", or better said limitation in design, is that game engines run on your CPU, not on your GPU. The engine only offloads graphical operations, like rasterizing or ray tracing to the GPU, which accelerates them, but it's still the CPU which drives the entire process. In high-framerate scenarios you can quickly reach a point where the CPU can't drive the process fast enough, so the GPU will start to idle, waiting for the CPU to tell it what to do next.

I never said it do not matter, but people that reviews new CPU shows the wrong games they should show results on games that depand a lot on CPU power like turn based games (like i stated in the first post)

for people that play turn based games like me it matters a great deal if a cpu shaves of a few seconds a turn you know how complicated games get the more turns you into a TBG.

Yes they do. Of course the games aren't going to be using any CPU on the title screen; that's basically a big "duh". Generally the GPU is only for rendering the graphics and the gameplay is on the CPU, and modern games do usually have a lot going on. Not to mention the CPU needs to push data through the rendering API, which can be pretty taxing when you have a lot of objects, though modern APIs (Vulkan/Metal/DX12) attempt to streamline that. Why do you think there've been efforts to have game engines be heavily multi-threaded, which they historically have not been...single-core CPU speeds haven't increased much for a while in favor of adding more cores, and one CPU core isn't really enough anymore.

oh my CPU is shaking in it's boots
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2650412511

should have loaded 3 anno's might have pushed it over the 15%....

The resolution makes no difference. That's a GPU function. And having 2 games open means zero. When one game is in a menu and the other in what looks to be an intro where neither one is actually performing anything complex, while using WINDOWS PERFMON to measure your benchmark renders your entire discussion moot. Some of those "GPU" games you're talking about use equal or even more complex CPU operations than many of the CPU intensive games that you're fawning over. If you think LTT don't know what they are doing, then why watch them?

Games can also be limited by the RAM's performance and that can be speed or timings or both. The games that want faster RAM will be happy with AMD's next bunch (beginning of next year).

Intel's new Gore 12,000 processors are faster in games, by the way, while drawing a tad less power, at least power used per frame or turn processed or whatever is the needed metric.

LTT usually do not go very in-depth in their processor reviews. I suggest looking elsewhere for better information. Ie Hardware Unboxed test many more games, if we stick to Youtube channels.