ID refers to quad core CPU's as a "few cores CPU" and to dual cores CPU's as "very few cores CPU's". So how many cores can this game use and how many does it need? Can it use all cores on AMD FX-8000 series CPU's? And all threads on i7 CPU's?

Even i7s are only quad core (8 processors) sooo...not really sure what we're supposed to be buying lol.

Well they're not 8 processors, but 4 cores that can be split into 8 smaller cores.

Maybe we are supposed to run the game with server motherboards so we can have multiple CPU's installed?

I'm starting to get this feeling

Just wondering because i was thinking of building a new PC soon and i can't decide between FX-6170 and FX-8170 CPU. If this game knows how to use all 8 cores on FX-8000 CPU's then i will buy that.

4 physical cores, 8 logical cores.

They recommend a Quad Core so I would say 4 cores.. peace.. UPDATE : Crap I mis- read the tread title.. Disregard my original post.

The original program has 24 threads so theoretically it could use 24 cpu cores max. It can do that because it sends the massive textures through the cores and can dedicate one core just to managing all the others. However, the original game is also 150gb of uncompressed textures so you'd also need ridiculous amounts of vram to put all those cores to work on all those textures. Carmack has suggested they may release a 75gb super texture pack and I assume that's a rough estimate of what a high end 2-3gb video card and 6 or 8 core cpu can handle. That the same program can use anywhere from 2 to 24 cores is nothing short of amazing if you ask me.

That's not true. I have an Intel i7 970 which has 6 physical cores. 12 cpu's

No. You have 1 intel i7 970 CPU which has 6 physical and 12 logical cores. It's called hyperthreading. You don't have 12 CPU's LOL.

Huh. So in order to play this game in it's full glory all i would need is a motherboard with 2 i7 990X CPU's on it and quad GTX580 SLI. Each card with 3gb of video memory.And this game doesn't even support SLI or crossfire. All i have is a GTX460 768mb LOL edition. This engine is ahead of it's time it seems. And just when technology catches up with it, Unreal engine 4 will be out and it will be the same story as it was with id tech 4.

You can't just add more processors and expect a program written for one chip to run them both. The amount of vram I'm talking about also needs to be on a single graphics card. I would think you'd need something resembling a commercial computer more then a desktop with the graphics card alone costing at least as much as the most expensive gaming computers on the market and being about 2 foot long.

Actually I was talking about the i7 2600k, like I have. So true

I think this would do it:
http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.asp?pn=270-WS-W555-A2&family=Motherboard%20Family&series=All%20Motherboards&sw=5

And this:
http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.asp?pn=03G-P3-1588-AR&family=GeForce%20500%20Series%20Family&sw=

LMAO PC reqs for a game that an xbox can run

Lets hope that a computer with those specs can run Crysis 3 on Uber quality mode.

AMD Phenom II x6 1100T 3.97GHz

6 cores. It's pretty clear they meant dual and single core processors when they said "few cores", and not quad core processors.

Starting to wonder if this is some kind of cruel social experiment...a) see if you can release a game and get buyers to completely alpha test game for you; and b.) see how capable and dedicated people are to resolving issues themselves with little to no help

I dont know if the patch fixes this but on my system (i7 920 @ 4.5 ghz) cpu load in game is 17 %
So besides no SLI support we dont even have multi-cpu support :I
I can only dream of how smooth this engine will work if it also supports these, right now it's already close to smooth as butter with only 1 cpu-core and 1 gpu-core in use !

IN RAGE ALL OF MY 4 CORES CPU WORKING 50% !

AND MY GRAPHIC CARD TEMPS IS 47 CENTIGRADE !

O M G ...REALLY!!111

Lol

OMG. LOL. And stuff like that.

I just read the review of a FX-8150 CPU. What a disaster. For gaming intel is still the king. I have Athlon II 270 btw.

It's a fallacy to assume best performance == 100% use of all cores [physical or logical]

In fact hitting that is more indicative of a problem.

Having overhead to deal with choke issues or background tasks will help ensure performance stays above optimal.

If you'd like to see if your processor can help out a bit more then I know that you can set the maximum number of transcoded texture pages per frame in your cfg... vt_maxPPF "32" [seems to be recommended for 6 cores]. Presumably there is a balance to be met here with other hardware, but on the off chance the autobalancer incorrectly assigned a value (?) you could try tweaking it.

Ultimately - if/when the engine becomes extended - I expect they'll be a whole host of things you can dedicate spare cpu and gpu processor time to...