The plugin difference is only apparent without extra rendering threads.

Nobbs66 also ran the same tests on his rig, so we would have both AMD and Intel data.

Just how much does using a Better instruction set boost FPS in PCSX2 The results are in, and they are interesting.

First, our hardware: Blyss Sarania: Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3 AM3 AMD FX 6300 4.40 Ghz 8GB (2 x 4GB) Kingston Ram 1600,9,9,9,27 HIS IceQ Radeon HD 7870 2GB 1300 core, 1200 mem 1TB Seagate Barracuda Lite-On CDVD-RW Nobbs66: Intel Core i5 4440 3,1ghz MSI Gtx 650 1GB OC Edition 8GB RAM 1333mhz ASRock H81M-HDS NZXT Phantom 410 NOTE: Only Nobbs66 results include AVX2, since my CPU does not support that.

We used Coupe 1 on the Silverlake southbound track, with no rivals.

We held the brake as the event started, and tested from where our car stopped.

Nobbs66: SSE2: 22 FPS SSSE3: 22.5 FPS SSE4.1: 22 FPS AVX: 23 FPS AVX2: 24.5 FPS Here we can see that the instruction set scaling is a bit different on the Intel CPU, but generally using more advanced instructions gets you more FPS.

Now, with 2 extra threads: Blyss Sarania: SSE2: 31.2 FPS SSSE3: 31.3 FPS SSE4.1: 31.8 FPS AVX: 31.8 FPS Interesting, right There is almost no difference between the instruction sets when you are using 2 extra rendering threads.

My guess is that when using extra threads, cross thread communication becomes the bottleneck and any gains from using the better instructions set get completely erased with my AMD chip.

But for Nobbs66s Intel chip, the story is a bit different: Nobbs66: SSE2: 39 FPS SSSE3: 39 FPS SSE4.1: 39 FPS AVX: 41 FPS AVX2: 46 FPS We see the same thing here.

In the first 4 cases, the boost from the instructions is basically negated when using more threads.

But look at AVX2 AVX2 is still significantly faster than SSE2 here, showing that for some reason it scales better with more threads So now you know.

If you arent using any extra threads, you will get a reasonable boost with AVXAVX2 over SSE2.

But if you are (and you should be unless you only have a dual core) then it really doesnt matter, unless you can use AVX2 If your chip supports AVX2, definitely make sure to use the AVX2 version of GSdx, as the performance gain is definitely there.

Blyss Sarania: SSE2: 51.1 FPS SSSE3: 51.3 FPS SSE4.1: 55 FPS AVX: 51.2 FPS Notice that SSE4.1 is faster in HW mode on AMD The others are all the same, but SSE4.1 is almost 8 faster Nobbs66: SSE2: 66 FPS SSSE3: 64 FPS SSE4.1: 69 FPS AVX: 66 FPS AVX2: 68 FPS For the Intel case we see a bit of weirdness, but SSE4.1 is again the fastest.

AVX2 does about the same, so its a good choice for hardware and software.

So for hardware mode, we have determined that SSE4.1 is the fastest in both Intel and AMD cases.

We have learned that for hardware mode, SSE4.1 is the fastest by far, but on the Intel side, AVX2 is basically the same.

For software, the more advanced instruction sets provide a boost, but that boost is negated when using extra rendering threads except in the case of AVX2.

AVX2 provides big benefits to PCSX2 in both hardware and software.

So what should you use It depends on what your chip supports.

Generally for software mode you should use the highest instruction set your chip supports.

So its like this: Intel chip that supports AVX2: Use AVX2 in all cases.

Its fastest in software mode, and the same as SSE4.1 in hardware.

AMD chip that supports AVX: Use AVX for software, but use SSE 4.1 for hardware.

No extra threads performance of all instruction sets are with in 5 of each other same goes for HW.

Sse3 Sse4 Avx2 Install For Mac