E Cores in Gaming: Boost or Bust for Your FPS - Byte Size Tech

[@BodySculptTV]

I have to agree 100% with you, E-cores are an essential part of your computing ecosystem. With that said I will point out that E-cores can hinder or help depending on the game. For example in Star Citizen disabling the E-Cores improves game play but then again Star Citizen is an unfinished product that probably will integrate E-Core support down the line. The very opposite occurs with Starfield, when I disable E-Cores I begin having issues. But lets remember that Windows 11 wasn't even supposed to occur, it was Intel reaching out to Microsoft for an architectural change in the OS for these new Hybrid processors to function correctly. If they went through the trouble of tweaking the OS for E-Cores I think its important you should be running them. At the very least like you said in your video the E-Cores are taking care of the background software so that the P-Cores aren't penalized and can game 100%. Thank you again for your programming, enjoyed this episode very much.

[@blkspade23]

The issue with Star Citizen is really that games themselves want to be ignoring the E cores, but SC wasn't. I've seen SC using 19 threads on a 5950X, so it wants more threads. Best case scenario is that those E cores are only used for disk IO, as there would otherwise be a penalty for them handling any render/draw call work. The distinct issue there is them being slower clocked with lower IPC, making them more latent at turning in work to the GPU. Background Windows stuff can fully utilize 4-6 threads, but that is mostly Windows Update and Defender. E cores would take the load off of the P cores, but that's more indirectly helping the game as opposed to actively being a part of the game. More P cores would always be better, since they'll do any job at equal speed. E cores aren't useful for the most important part of actually running a game, they are mostly just additional threads to make up for Windows being Windows. If/When the render threading starts going over the P core allotment, you're right back at "4 cores ought to be enough for gaming/7700K". It's already becoming more common to see games eating up 12-16 threads. Games maxing out the PS5 will probably fall around 14 threads, not accounting for the supposed dedicate IO controller and decompression engine.

[@Whiskeyagogo519]

I play star citizen and I'm try disabled e cores today . I agree with there logic but I need to see for my self😊

[@raulhidalgo6817]

The people that want to disable the e-cores might aswell buy a 7800x3d

[@LorentGuimaraes]

My e cores are ai upscalling my old pr0n collection on the background while I am playing games

[@roqeyt3566]

Informative as always tech!

[@Ultrajamz]

Wondering if it is time to upgrade to W11

[@weetjewatikwil1]

I must say atm win 11 is not bad atm so why not

[@dianaalyssa8726]

For 12th/recent cpus it's more mature now than it was on leak and launch. Am using Tiny11 for gaming, CTT tool to give back the right click menu. You can customize the lower bar to be more minimalistic/pretty but I stopped doing that since explorer can break that way. If you don't have p and e cores, 10 might still be better. Eventually in a couple years/so there will be no choice.

[@ElladanKenet]

I wouldn't upgrade from 10 to 11, but if you're buying new I'd def get 11. At this point, I don't think you can even buy new hardware with 10 pre-installed

[@Ultrajamz]

@@ElladanKenet I built earlier this year and used a w10 code.

[@Blaquegold]

I don’t know about you all but I’m looking forward to have 8/16 p cores and at meat 40 e cores! I’m looking forward to 1 pc taking the place of 2 builds if you game and stream.

[@forog1]

I 50 50 this. E cores are perfectly fine to have but really? like really? Do we really need 24 of them while only having 8 P cores? Id sacrifice like 8 of them for 2 more P cores. 16 E cores should be cap making a CPU a nice 10 P core 16 E cores and everyone will be happy and can see the tech improving just by those numbers.

[@Frozoken]

Disagree about the latter statement but agree with the 1st. On a 13900k optimum tech was showing ecores increasing 1% lows and decreasing input latency about 15% vs having them off but I feel like you would get all of that from 8 of them too, especially with an extra 2 pcores in their place. Ecores don't need a limit though, 13900k users are showing all 16 getting pegged when downloading and extracting games and stuff because the more u have the more stuff u can take away from ur pcores having to do. I think on that someone with a 12700k was noticing a signicant slow down in the same task because his 4 low clocked ecores weren't enough and the scheduler wouldn't shift the work to the pcores until he disabled them. Personally I'd rather that rumoured arrow Lake 40 core was like 10 p cores and 24 ecores or 12+16 but there's also rumours that these ecores have ipc between alder Lake and rocket Lake big cores with presumably much lower clock speeds but still. They are mid cores not ecores in reality

[@forog1]

@@Frozoken Its the reason I say yeah I can definitely see a use in those Ecores and having them is far better then not having them. But what I'm saying is if Intel even thinks about increasing the e cores from a max of 16 id rather the P cores get a bump in count before we go higher in E cores. Like whatever the name of the 15900k equivalent will be next gen a like you said 12P core and 16E core or 24E core would be awesome id make the switch from my AMD 5950x to something like that! But probably put a custom power limit on it because Intel now days don't believe in it lol

[@forog1]

I know just simply downloading games can max out my 16 cores in my 5950x so yeah downloading can use all cores which is interesting lol

[@yourfriend3054]

Me too that's so dumb from intel

[@ElladanKenet]

To those benchmarking 5+ year old games, after years of updates and 2 or more generations of new GPUs and CPUs, does it really matter if 'ecores don't effect gameplay!' Feels like a half-answer to a very specific and unrealistic scenario, that should have NO IMPACT on NEW HARDWARE inquiries. Your game ran fine on the old stuff. Of course it'll run fine on the new stuff. And it's no surprise if new features have zero impact on your old software that wasn't designed at all for it. The real question is, how does it effect future and upcoming stuff? Here's my hedged bet: GTA 6 is the most anticipated game of the last fifteen years, and it's probably going to run amazingly on 12th, 13th, and 14th gen, and feel very lackluster on 10th and 11th gen. Those ecores are probably going to be super useful with a Next Gen open world experience with all of the NPCs being kept track of in real time, and not just generated when you come in sight.

[@didamnesia3575]

Yep, going to be harder to run from the cops and whatever npc is chasing you for anti social behavior

[@LastExile1989]

Unreal engine 5? Yea sure... Lackluster on 11th and 10th Gen? Do you hear yourself?

[@ElladanKenet]

@@LastExile1989 That is exactly what I said. Hey, I could be wrong. Just a prediction.

[@forzaelite1248]

@@ElladanKenet with the state modern games are released in and rumors of 40 core Intel mainline CPUs in the works I'd say it's just a matter of time...

[@kaanwetrust]

I have a 3700x with 16gb of ddr4 and a 6600xt build, I have 1000$ to spend but Im thinking just upgrading gpu to 6800x and wait for next gen to buy a new pc What do u suggest to this ?

[@bullyakker]

If you have a microcenter nearby, check out their Intel/AMD Bundles. cpu, ram and motherboard starting at $349 (12700k) $399 for 12900k or a 7700x, I think $479 for a 13700k package

[@kotztotz3530]

Can you buy a 5700x and sell your 3700x? That might be worth it.

[@mr_pants]

Upgrade to a 5700x/5800x for $200 and you can get a 7900XT or 4070Ti for $750. You can also sell your 3700x and use the extra cash towards a 5800x3d.

[@kaanwetrust]

@@mr_pants thats exceeding my budget, I probably will get a 5700x and for gpu normally its like 600$ for new 6800 or 650$ for 6800xt but I found a local reseller who sells for like 300$ for 6800 and 250$ for 6700xt Also 4070 is like 1000$ so its exceeding so much And my psu is 650w 80plus bronze so it seems like my only option is to get a 6700xt

[@dianaalyssa8726]

I have mine on currently past few months have played on 12700KF and 12900KF now. Actually think the core isolation setting might be more of a thing to test than ecores for gaming performance. I do see some guides saying to go into the BIOS and turn off the ecores so the P cores can boost more in game. Am on Windows 11. But guides saying in this game your ecores should be off, kind of make it questionable. However even while gaming I do some background tasks, browser etc. I think the ecores are handling that.

[@Frozoken]

It's much more nuanced on alderlake where ur ring frequency will drop signicantly with ecores enabled. Either overclock ur ecores seeing the ring frequency decrease is bcuz it matches ecore frequency or actually *maybe* consider turning them off on a 12700k. Either way if ur gon do all that, just overclock the ecores at that point to like 4-4.2ghz.

[@ossamafayez]

need an advice can i run 12600k on MB b760 !! i want to get the benefit of this p+ e cores cuz i'm playing FPS games and listening to music and using discord too ..all in same time ...the MB type Z so expansive and i do not have any plans to overlocking the CPU the base 12600k enough for me and i do not want to use 12400 ..so can i run 12600k with b 760 without any down effect on the performance..i have rx6600 8 gb

[@Frozoken]

Optimum tech already proved that even in esport games that are typically lightly threaded, e cores signicantly improve perforance when enabled on UR BEST CASE (13900k) let alone one with 6 pcores. 1% lows were over 15% higher when in then off, averages were like 7% higher too for overwatch. I think in modern warfare something similar and his total system latency went from ~6ms-~8ms when turning them off too. If ur on raptor lake theres literally 0 reason to have them off and u are also actively hindering even your gaming performance, its not even a sidegrade with a clean system as people try to argue.

[@npcDroneClass]

is it true the eCores are a jab at RISC processing? less power in computing = less capable? or is that a wrong way to look at it?

[@skawalker35]

Trying to choose between a 13600 and a 12700. What would you say? 13600?

[@ByteSizeTech]

13600

[@rpospeedwagon]

More people need to know this "nuance."

[@Whiskeyagogo519]

I have a i7 12700f and I'm shutting down e cores to see if my game star citizen will run better

[@Moosemanity]

Awesome reply 😎

[@Foxconnpc]

I have R7 5700G and i5 13500. I have played and beat Gran Turismo 5 (PCSX3) on both. The difference was staggering. 8 cores of the Ryzen just could not compile shaders fast enough for a comfortable play. Some times I was staring at a skybox texture for a full minute, cuz none of the objects were done compiling. Intel was blazing fast in comparison and much more enjoyable as a result. Also, emulation speed would tank on AMD if I dare to open a browser, or stream the gameplay.

[@walter274]

That's a great point, in a premade bench mark, the CPU isn't calculating much in the way of NPC behavior.

[@waduhmasbroh]

lemme guess, is it ETA prime?

[@stanisawkowalski7440]

I don't see a reason explaining this rant with E-cores being some worse kind of cores, somehow worse than P-Cores and useless for gaming. E-Cores increase multicore performance just like P-Cores and Thread Director manages them all by itself, so game developers don't need to work extra to support them (to the point of doing here extra being not recommended due to causing problems). So what's the difference between E-cores and "real cores"? About them not adding much to games, probably it's the thing with anything more than strong, modern 8 cores is harder to spot making a difference in current games.

[@antoniocepaj7544]

I live in Europe, and prices include 25% tax. At this prices what CPU would you choose for Z-760 ddr5 ASRock sonic motherboard ( 200€) ? 13400 = 290€, 13600k = 390€, 13700k = 520€. For now will be paired with zotac twin 3060 12Gb gpu, and 32GB RAM, using single 2k 27"inch monitor. Used as gaming AAA multiplayer shooting sandbox games, and casual 3d modelling in autocad. I can use maximum 240mm AIO to cool CPU. If I'll need in future I might upgrade to 14'th gen CPU.

[@steve4073]

i use process lasso to assign all my recent high end games to the Pcores and older games can run onthe ecores with there been 16 of them on the 13900k . i also assign my vr software to the ecores like oculus vr software for my quest 3 so the pcores can consentrate on making the game run fast so they can be used if used wisely. i assign gameslike AC, Dirt rally 1 & 2 , msfs, xp12, to the pcores then assign my vr oculus software to the ecores so the game and pcores does not steal from the ecores and vr software and the ecores dont steal off the pcores and the games fps. so i get more stable game play and fps as the cpu is been utilized more efficiently

[@mikeramos91]

The way I see it it’s better to have those extra e cores than just an 8core 16 thread cpu 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@Dankuzmeemusmaximus]

Same, which is why it baffles me people spend i9 money on a 8 core 7800x3d

[@LastExile1989]

​@@DankuzmeemusmaximusBecause in games they're about the same.

[@Dankuzmeemusmaximus]

@@LastExile1989 people said the same about i5's in 2015

[@walerybien8193]

E cores are not cool in gaming for me. They cause micro stutter in most my games, also older ones. Turning em off solves the problem. It's so stupid to go into bios anytime i need to Switch between work/computing and gaming

[@JavierRiquelme]

Project Lasso

[@sadatislamkhan3707]

Hey umm can you tell me about 13500 cause 13600k is about 120 dollars more in my country.

[@ElladanKenet]

According to intels page, they have the same core count, but the 13600k has a faster clock, faster boost, more cache, and a higher power draw. Compared to the 12th gen, the 12600k had e cores, but the 12400 had only 6 pcores. So not a huge difference for the 13500, if the 600k is way pricier

[@Frozoken]

13500 is like 20% slower on the pcores

[@ryan7030]

My Setup I9 13900KF, RTX 4090 Suprim x, 32gigs c34 7200mhz RAM, Z790 MSI tomahawk mobo and 3 2tb samsung 980 pro NVME drives in a Lian Li Lancool 3 oh and a 360 AIO

[@didamnesia3575]

Why didn't you buy 48gb or 64gb of RAM?

[@TheMostSavageOfAllGeese]

He doesn’t need it with that monster of a setup.

[@ryan7030]

@@didamnesia3575 Not needed my friend!

[@Drprathamchess]

Is e core marketing gimick

[@portman8909]

Yes

[@LMT069]

Bust for gaming and it broke windows, AMD variable cores was a much better usage.

[@portman8909]

Despite Intel having e cores their CPU's don't last as long or perform as well as Ryzen Zen 4 chips on battery. Clearly it's not all that "efficient"

[@Frozoken]

Yeah except the high performance Zen 4 mobile chips where they moved to chiplets and the power draw from ccd and iod communication caused even that new x3d mobile chip to get ~20% less battery on video playback than the 13980hx. 😂. Also yes it has been well established by now that they're mid cores not efficiency cores.

[@goatcity2266]

E-cores and V-cash are cheap gimmicks

[@portman8909]

E cores yes. V-cache no. There are many games that like having the extra L3 cache and major gains can be seen. I believe Factorio seen the biggest difference, along with MS flight sim.