1. Computer problem? Tech Support Guy is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations. Click here to join today! If you're new to Tech Support Guy, we highly recommend that you visit our Guide for New Members.

Solved: Picking a CPU (Duo-Core vs. Quad-Core)

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by XboxGuy15, Jun 23, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement
  1. XboxGuy15

    XboxGuy15 Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    131
    Ok, I'm building a CPU and I'm stuck between Intel's Core 2 Duo E8500 and their Core 2 Quad Q9300. I was going to go for the quad-core, but I heard things about how apps still aren't optimized for four cores. I will mainly be gaming, occasionally using photoshop and flash.

    My problem is
    a) I want games and apps to run good today
    b) I want have a solid CPU that will give me excellent performance for the next 2-3 years.

    What's the techguy.org consensus? I have to go with Intel as I already bought a mobo, and $270 is my absolute price maximum for a processor.
     
  2. jamesx121

    jamesx121

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    910
    my vote is for the this--
    http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3574211

    its only 199.99 with a 10$ instant savings--- I have one and I have yet to see the blue
    screen of death....
    it pegs my Vista CPU Experencie out at 5.9

    I play C&C3 Kane's Wrath and Call of Duty4 no problem with either High or Ultra High
    settings
    I have BioSock but have problems loading it
    Ithink this is a DVD burner problem--
    I did go from 2GBs of dual channel DDR2 800mhz to 4GBs of dual channel DDR2 800mhz
    and this made my Vista Memory Experience drop down from 5.9 to 4.7--
    don't under stand that but that memory-not CPU--

    this E8400 has done every thing I have asked out of it with no slow downs that I can see--
    and also the E8400 seems to be the way to go (from forum members) if you want Intel

    I can't say anything about video editing or making movies with a Quad Core like you see on the big screen so too me right now a Quad Core isn't necessary.

    until software comes out that can take advantage of a 64bit operating system--
    a Quad is over kill
     
  3. Compiler

    Compiler

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2006
    Messages:
    5,855
    As of today, the Quadcore Q6600(2.4Ghz) and the E8400(3.0Ghz) are about the same price ($200). As we move into 2009, more and more games are making use of the extra 2 cores. For today, depending on the software - these two chips are about even. If software doesn't use extra cores, the E8400 is faster, otherwise, the Q6600 is faster. Now if YOURE doing more things on your PC at the exact same time (gaming, downloading, IMing, Vista) Yeah, consider how much background crap Vista does - those cores can help.

    Also, OCing a Q6600 to 3.0Ghz is easy. Should stick on a better $25 fan thou.
     
  4. XboxGuy15

    XboxGuy15 Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    131
    I keep going back and forth between the two, and after posing the question on this and other forums hasn't helped my decision any.

    The only factor I can think of is that I would like to play some older games, ones that may be slowed by the quad-core. Is that a factor, and how much will they be affected? They won't (god forbid) run poorly, will they?
     
  5. Compiler

    Compiler

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2006
    Messages:
    5,855
    1) if you're talking about OLDER games, lets say Half Life2, Doom3, UT2004 - even my SLOW and OLD AMD X2 3800 will play those games at MAX details in 1600x1200. A modern Qaud (AMD or intel) will murder my chip.

    2) If the game doesn't know how to multi-thread for multi-core, it just ignores it. But you still get the advantage that Windows and other programs will make use of those cores.

    Check out this chart... games are starting to use more cores. The 3.0dual core runs about equal to a 2.4quad, and sometimes that quad is easily faster. Imagine overclocking that quad to 3.0Ghz?

    Check out the benchmarks: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3293&p=8
     
  6. Gulo Luseus

    Gulo Luseus

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,458
    Go for the Quaddie. Old games run fine and I have found no probs at all- apart from wipeout 2097, where it ran so damn fast i couldnt play it!
    Re 4 vs 2 cores, corredct, theres not a lot supporting it. But then again if yo uwant something good for a few years, I cant see unoptimised software being too far off.
    As said, o/cing the quad is simple as, and in terms of heat, theres not a lot between a stock and an o/c to 3.2. If you prefer, you can always run on 2 core instead of 4 core, so really, a quad seems th ebest bet. Me? I likes my quaddie :)
     
  7. XboxGuy15

    XboxGuy15 Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    131
    Ok guys, Quad-core it is! Thread = solved.
     
  8. Sponsor

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 733,556 other people just like you!

Loading...
Similar Threads - Solved Picking (Duo
  1. farmerguy101
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    171
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Short URL to this thread: https://techguy.org/723771

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice