PDA

View Full Version : Dual-Core vs. Quad-Core


cobra_man
08-03-2008, 09:26 AM
In a new PC build, I'm having a hard time justifying the more expensive Quad-Core over a cheaper dual-core.

I just don't see me running so many different things at once and it seems that no programs (games) even come close to being able to utilize all four cores.


Save $100 and go with the Dual-Core?
Please discuss.

PsiRedEye22
08-03-2008, 09:34 AM
Doesn't make a damn difference in any game that exists today.

Zane
08-03-2008, 10:28 AM
In games atm theres no real big difference, but if your gonna buy a new comp why not make it a bit more future proof and get a quad core?
and if you do insist on getting a dual core the E8400 is good stuff

SyDias
08-03-2008, 10:56 AM
If you're going to be doing encoding and crap the Quad will pull ahead, but like everyone else said, the difference at the moment is almost marginal because of program utilization.

If you want to go the cheap route with a lesser upgrade future, the dual-core is your best bet, however, if you want to stay competitive, you might as well buy the Quad.

Papero
08-03-2008, 11:28 AM
You're already spending hundreds, what's another hundred going to do? Is it really going to break the bank for you? Stay future proof.

The_Canadian
08-03-2008, 11:57 AM
Quad core is better

aooga12
08-03-2008, 01:04 PM
Doesn't make a damn difference in any game that exists today.

exactly, quad core is more for like running dual monitors and shit like that.... like heres an example...

my uncle makes video games and hes doing something for the history channel right now and here is his setup.

2 20" samsung monitors
2 geforce 8800 ultra
4gb ram
3.0 quad core processors...

rand0m
08-03-2008, 01:22 PM
Future proofing? Quad core.

Cheap? Dual core.

TomVanDamme
08-03-2008, 01:32 PM
go with quad core, you will probably need it for the future windows operating systems

cobra_man
08-03-2008, 03:06 PM
If I buy a quad-core today, by the time it's utilized fully in games, won't it already be out of date in terms of speed and hence, capability?

Avo
08-03-2008, 03:12 PM
my uncle makes video games and hes doing something for the history channel right now and here is his setup.

What is he creating?

EVO_9MR
08-03-2008, 03:17 PM
if you're gettin an intel, i hope you mean a core 2 duo and not a "dual core". Dual core=shit.

cobra_man
08-03-2008, 03:48 PM
I mean dual core as in 2 cores.
What's bad about Intel dual cores? I was thinking about going with AMD since they're so much cheaper for some reason (performance difference?).

rand0m
08-03-2008, 04:09 PM
if you're gettin an intel, i hope you mean a core 2 duo and not a "dual core". Dual core=shit.

Core 2 Duo isn't a "dual core"?

Thats new to me.

EVO_9MR
08-03-2008, 04:14 PM
Core 2 Duo isn't a "dual core"?

Thats new to me.

Yeah, dual core is the cheaper version of the core 2 duo.

Core 2 Duo > Pentium Dual core

There's a significant leap in performance when comparing the two. But then again, i'm talking about just intel.

cobra_man
08-03-2008, 04:18 PM
Yeah, dual core is the cheaper version of the core 2 duo.

Core 2 Duo > Pentium Dual core

There's a significant leap in performance when comparing the two. But then again, i'm talking about just intel.

Oh, hell. I thought they were the same.
Do they still make the plain Dual cores? I only see 3 on sale at newegg.

Why are the Intel Core 2 Duos so much more than AMD's?

PossumLuver
08-03-2008, 04:21 PM
See the thing about Dual core is that its only 2 cores, but Quad core has 4 so there's the difference. No thanking needed.:wave:

EVO_9MR
08-03-2008, 04:28 PM
See the thing about Dual core is that its only 2 cores, but Quad core has 4 so there's the difference. No thanking needed.:wave:

I know this is a lame attempt at trolling, but i can't help it. More cores only means more performance when you have several programs running at once. Most games aren't even programmed to utilize the extra cores, not even Crysis.

OP: Do not buy a dual core unless you want Celeron level performance. There's a reason core 2 duo's are more expensive

rand0m
08-03-2008, 04:32 PM
Yeah, dual core is the cheaper version of the core 2 duo.

Core 2 Duo > Pentium Dual core

There's a significant leap in performance when comparing the two. But then again, i'm talking about just intel.

You're not making anysense.

The 'shitty' Intel Processors I think your refering to are "Core Duo" processors.

Dual Core Processors are Dual core processors ... ie they have 2 processing thingamebobs in them.

EVO_9MR
08-03-2008, 04:42 PM
You're not making anysense.

The 'shitty' Intel Processors I think your refering to are "Core Duo" processors.

Dual Core Processors are Dual core processors ... ie they have 2 processing thingamebobs in them.

My bad, you're right, they're the Core Duos. I was gettin them confused with the Pentium dual cores:
http://www.intel.com/products/processor_number/chart/pentium_dual-core.htm

used_me
08-03-2008, 05:30 PM
If your building a new machine, the best way to appreciate it is with a nice big widescreen moniter. Mine still blows me away when I play crysis on max, and TF2 looks orgasmic..

SyDias
08-03-2008, 11:06 PM
Why are the Intel Core 2 Duos so much more than AMD's?

Unfortunately the Intel C2D's are a better line of processor than AMD's X2.

Zane
08-04-2008, 01:59 AM
With the way they are making games now and the fact that a lot of big gaming companies are going to want to make games with PCI.e 10.1
that you can get from the ATI cards (ati ftw) quad core definetly is the better choice, even get the Q6600 even though it has reached EOL for intel apparently
and yes intel cpu's are much better than AMD atm
video cards on the other hand amd are rocking atm
but yeh, invest in the future

usefulidiot316
08-04-2008, 03:51 AM
If you play games, there's really no point in buying quad core. $100 is better spent on a higher end video card, as $100 can mean the difference between an HD3850 and an HD 4850.

And don't try to future proof your machine by putting in more cores. Plenty of people thought they were future proofing their computers with P4 dual cores, or Athlon X2s that used the old socket 939, or people that tried to SLI high end video cards. If you try to future proof your machine by using a quad core before 4 threads are being used, you'll be pissed off when you find out that in a couple months, the next processor from Intel will have 8 cores with Hyper Threading, triple channel memory, an integrated memory controller, DDR3 support, and put on a new socket.

YorkshireMan
08-04-2008, 08:33 AM
I just got Quad core cos people say its more future proof, but yeah i just wanted a decent processor, and the Q6600 Intel Quad core Processor had got decent reviews.