Choosing a Gaming CPU: Single + Multi-GPU at 1440p, April 2013
by Ian Cutress on May 8, 2013 10:00 AM ESTSleeping Dogs
While not necessarily a game on everybody’s lips, Sleeping Dogs is a strenuous game with a pretty hardcore benchmark that scales well with additional GPU power. The team over at Adrenaline.com.br are supreme for making an easy to use benchmark GUI, allowing a numpty like me to charge ahead with a set of four 1440p runs with maximum graphical settings.
One 7970
Sleeping Dogs seems to tax the CPU so little that the only CPU that falls behind by the smallest of margins is an E6400 (and the G465 which would not run the benchmark). Intel visually takes all the top spots, but AMD is all in the mix with less than 0.5 FPS splitting an X2-555 BE and an i7-3770K.
Two 7970s
A split starts to develop between Intel and AMD again, although you would be hard pressed to choose between the CPUs as everything above an i3-3225 scores 50-56 FPS. The X2-555 BE unfortunately drops off, suggesting that Sleeping Dogs is a fan of the cores and this little CPU is a lacking.
Three 7970s
At three GPUs the gap is there, with the best Intel processors over 10% ahead of the best AMD. Neither PCIe lane allocation or memory seems to be playing a part, just a case of threads then single thread performance.
Four 7970s
Despite our Beast machine having double the threads, an i7-3960X in PCIe 3.0 mode takes top spot.
It is worth noting the scaling in Sleeping Dogs. The i7-3960X moved from 28.2 -> 56.23 -> 80.85 -> 101.15 FPS, achieving +71% increase of a single card moving from 3 to 4. This speaks of a well written game more than anything.
One 580
There is almost nothing to separate every CPU when using a single GTX 580.
Two 580s
Same thing with two GTX 580s – even an X2-555 BE is within 1 FPS (3%) of an i7-3960X.
Sleeping Dogs Conclusion
Due to the successful scaling and GPU limited nature of Sleeping Dogs, almost any CPU you throw at it will get the same result. When you move into three GPUs or more territory, it seems that having the single thread CPU speed of an Intel processor gets a few more FPS at the end of the day.
242 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link
I'm getting close to doing so, as his "contributions" are completely useless. Vote here for banning or not -- I'm inclined to just leave it be for now, but if he continues to post prolifically with nothing meaningful, I'll take action.Egg - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link
Please, yes, bansilverblue - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
Seconded... it gets tiresome after a while.Donniesito - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
Please banjjmcubed - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
ban pleasejjmcubed - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
I did not mean Donniestio... me smart good.iamezza - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
Please ban him. There really is no reason to leave trolls like this on the forum, they contribute nothing and constantly derail meaningful discussion.I can't think of a single reason to not ban him (and other) trolls.
creed3020 - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
Please ban, I come down here to read constructive comments not useless dribble.R3MF - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
ban.smuff3758 - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link
Ban this loser. He simply can not leave his fan boy status alone long enough to evaluate an outstanding SCIENTIFC analysis. I love both Intel and AMD CPU's. Both have their places just depends on what your objectives are.