The Great Core Debate

H

Hav0k

Rookie
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
99
Ok guys, so I need your opinions.

I need to buy a new PC (moved away from home and cant hog dad's pc anymore :( )

Im looking into one of these new multi-core cpu's and have a basic question.

What would be better:

Dual Core 3.10GHz with 6MB of Cache

or

Quad Core 3.00GHz with 6MB of Cache

Im thinking that more cores does not necessarily mean faster processing speeds...but I have yet to buy a multi-core cpu and wanted some input before buying a PC next month.

thanks
 
in the case you mentioned i would go with the quad.

but this is how it works the more cores you have the better your pc can multitask and run multi threaded applications but the problem is that most games aren't multi threaded so they cant take advantage of all of the cores so when it comes to games clock speed is more important.
 
The quad core is better. It's also more future proof for tomorrows more intensive games. So if you can afford or want to spend the money on it then definitely get the quad. If you're feeling a little more frugal then the dual core will still serve you very well.
 
no matter wat nowadays, get the quad, especially on a desktop. True some games dont use all 4 quads, actually most games but you will still have the advantage in most everyday applications and such. You can always also overclock a Quad which is what i do. You can overclock a quad to the same speed as overclocking a duo pretty much give or take a couple of .mhz to the duo due to temperature and such. I have my Q6600 at 3.7 ghz and this is the first quad that came out yet it is still a monster, especially at 3.7, all you need is a good aftermarket heatsink fan and you can go crazy with the quads, especially the newer ones on 45nm die's.
 
Geheimwaffe and bullets are right on the money. If you can afford the quad core, I think you won't regret paying the premium.
 
the quad will keep you safe from upgrading. quads will stay top of the line for the next 3-4 years before something stupid comes out like 10 cores or something.
 
quad core indeed -

Also, be sure if you REALLY need to buy now that you get a machine that includes an upgrade to Windows 7 (64 bit of course). If that's not included in the price, get a different machine or wait until October.
 
Considering a quad core 2.3 and a dual core 3.0 are the same price and the quad out perfroms the dual everytime, you will want to go quad in the long run.
 
TRI CORE FTW!
No, but really, quad core is the way to go. I've got a triple core just because of the price. I'm considering unlocking the 4th core just because quads are that much better :P
 
Dual core is your JUST going to playing the games and regular use.
Quad core if you want to play multiple games at once or one game with lots of apps in the background.

I'd say go for the quad.
 
Dual core is your JUST going to playing the games and regular use.
Quad core if you want to play multiple games at once or one game with lots of apps in the background.

I'd say go for the quad.
Click to expand...

Your somewhat right. Dual core isnt really all that amazing nowadays at games considering the fact that you can pretty much overclock a Quad like mad now and achieve similar overclock speeds as a DUO can.
I also doubt someone will be playing multiple games at once and even so, a quad can be utilized by one game nowadays like crysis or something. Its just that not that many games use all 4 cores. To play games with apps in the background you need ram which basically helps you run multiple things at once smoothly, if you have like 2gb of ram i doubt you will be running a game plus multiple apps in the background, you need like 4 atleast to do so. Windows 7 and Vista utilize like 800mb or 900 without running any apps sometimes 600 but rarely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top