wine users - Feb 2011 - Current best AMD processor for running mainstream games?

Hi all,

I want to buy a processor that will be good for gaming in Wine in FreeBSD. I see
that many game engines are starting to take advantage of multi-core systems,
however it appears that multi-threaded applications are not distributed properly
across multiple cores (Ex: Starcraft II -
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=20882 ). So
I'm not sure if I should aim for single-core (Athlon, Sempron, Opteron?) or
multi-core (Phenom 4-core, 6-core?). What would you fine folks recommend?

Many thanks,

You should probably ask on a computer forum rather than the Wine support forum.
;)

DaVince wrote:
> You should probably ask on a computer forum rather than the Wine support
forum. ;)
Nevermind, I somehow failed to read the post properly. Intel processors are
usually a better bet if you want a single core to perform really well
(especially the i7 series).

On 02/24/2011 09:28 PM, pin-no-err wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I want to buy a processor that will be good for gaming in Wine in
FreeBSD.<snip>  however it appears that multi-threaded applications are
not distributed properly across multiple cores<snip>  should aim for
single-core (Athlon, Sempron, Opteron?) or multi-core (Phenom 4-core, 6-core?)
I have a Phenom 4-core and have not had any trouble gaming, but I also 
use the computer for everything so non-game applications were a 
consideration when I bought the system. I have not tried SC2 so I can't 
say how bad that issue is on this chipset. I also have not researched 
the issue, is that something that could be fixed through a later wine 
update? If so I would go with the fastest individual core speed Phenom 4 
or 6 core I could afford in the hopes of the games being playable now 
and better later. If the problem is on the game side and they show no 
interest in fixing it I might still do the same depending on what other 
games and applications I wanted the computer to be good for. For the 
single core chips we have been happy with both Athlon and Opterons, I 
think you can bet a little better numbers with the Opterons so they 
might be the better choice for just games.

tparker wrote:
> On 02/24/2011 09:28 PM, pin-no-err wrote:
> I have a Phenom 4-core and have not had any trouble gaming, but I also 
> use the computer for everything so non-game applications were a 
> consideration when I bought the system. I have not tried SC2 so I can't
> say how bad that issue is on this chipset. I also have not researched 
> the issue, is that something that could be fixed through a later wine 
> update? If so I would go with the fastest individual core speed Phenom 4 
> or 6 core I could afford in the hopes of the games being playable now 
> and better later. If the problem is on the game side and they show no 
> interest in fixing it I might still do the same depending on what other 
> games and applications I wanted the computer to be good for. For the 
> single core chips we have been happy with both Athlon and Opterons, I 
> think you can bet a little better numbers with the Opterons so they 
> might be the better choice for just games.
I can't seem to find any single core Opterons these days - minimum I can
find is 2 core, and that's for AM2 sockets (and can only saturate DDR2 ram?
Am I mistaken?)

Should I restrict my selection to AM3 Opterons
(http://products.amd.com/en-us/opteroncpuresult.aspx?f1=Quad-Core+AMD+Opteron%E2%84%A2&f2=&f3=Yes&f4=&f5=512&f6=AM3&f7=C2&f8=45nm+SOI&f9=75+W&f10=2200&f11=4&)?

Assuming so, would something like an Opteron 1389
(http://products.amd.com/en-us/OpteronCPUDetail.aspx?id=563&f1=Quad-Core+AMD+Opteron%E2%84%A2&f2=&f3=Yes&f4=&f5=512&f6=AM3&f7=C2&f8=45nm+SOI&f9=75+W&f10=2200&f11=4&)
(2.9ghz, 4-core, AM3) be ideal then?

Or were you suggesting something more like this:
AMD Phenom II X4 Black
(http://products.amd.com/en-us/DesktopCPUDetail.aspx?id=714&f1=&f2=&f3=&f4=&f5=&f6=&f7=&f8=&f9=&f10=&f11=&f12=)
or
AMD Phenom II X6 Black
(http://products.amd.com/en-us/DesktopCPUDetail.aspx?id=726&f1=&f2=&f3=&f4=&f5=&f6=&f7=&f8=&f9=&f10=&f11=&f12=)

Hi

I would (currently) say Core i3. The SB Core i3 CPUs are so low power that they
will easily OC to 4Ghz on air... Core i3 is good target for most games which
aren't more than dual-threaded. The hyperthreading will help to reduce FPS
glitching.

Intel's IPC lead over AMD is increasing year-on-year (as AMD are still using
a derivative of their successful K8 architecture). AMD currently need to pull of
a bit of miracle with their Bulldozer platform (this/next year) to remain viable
in the longer term.

Phoronix did an article comparing Sandy Bridge performance vs. previous
generations of Intel CPUs.
Benchmarking SB under Linux
(http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_corei5_2500k&num=1)

I have noted that the SB CPUs do have remarkably low power consumption
(http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-efficienct-32-nm,2831-7.html).
Only a big deal if you want to reduce your carbon footprint or pay for your own
electricity...

The only price point Intel cannot compete with AMD is the very low end (Athlon
II range is very cheap).

Bob

Charles Davis wrote:
> On 2/26/11 6:31 PM, pin-no-err wrote:
> 
> > With all this talk about intel stuff, now I'm starting to wonder
if I should go with Nvidia or ATI (AMD). I was set on the Radeon HD 6970
(http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/amd-radeon-hd-6000/hd-6970/Pages/amd-radeon-hd-6970-overview.aspx)
but now I'm starting to wonder... Is Nvidia better supported than ATI?
> > 
> Just pick any "having problems with video" thread at random. They
> invariably say, "Intel and ATI video sucks, get an nVidia card."
> 
> Chip
Actually, it's usually the Intel graphical chipsets having a problem. Unless
I lucked out with my 2 systems containing ATI graphics cards, ATI video support
REALLY isn't that bad in Wine.

I don't have one yet (but should sometime soon) but the newer Intel HD 3000
(Sandy Bridge) appears to be really good in performance for Intel.  it gets near
the performance of the nvidia Geforce 320m, and I've had a few reports of
people using it with Wineskin to play games that previously only nvidia and ATI
cards could even run without crashing.  Maybe Intel will have some decent Linux
drivers for this...