Thread: Dual vs Quad core?

Well, it depends on what you are playing. For the most part, I know of very few games that can actually use all 4 cores (if any, I'm not sure if games like Crysis can use 4 cores or not).

More games are now using dual cores, and have really not touched too much into the Quads yet. If your thinking about upgrading now, I'd just go with a dual core as it'll serve your purpose better most likely and by the time games start to use Quad cores, they'll be better/cheaper ones out that you can buy.

Best for all around gaming and coding movies is the Q6600 for $199.

Depends... Most dual core CPUs have a higher standard clock speed than the quads. If you're willing to tweak and overclock you can get the same performance out of the quad core chips in games. You can effectively ignore 3DMark06 scores when it comes to real-world gaming performance. Most games won't even see a single FPS increase with a quad core vs a dual core at the same clock speed.

Originally Posted by WileECyte

Depends... Most dual core CPUs have a higher standard clock speed than the quads. If you're willing to tweak and overclock you can get the same performance out of the quad core chips in games. You can effectively ignore 3DMark06 scores when it comes to real-world gaming performance. Most games won't even see a single FPS increase with a quad core vs a dual core at the same clock speed.

Roger that.



Here is an answer to the same question from awhile back:

http://www.texasteamplayers.com/inde...0513#msg340513


If you lok at the lnks in that message they go to a bunch of charts at toms guide; and the dual cores win for gaming.


I would add though that the games of the future will benefit from more than two cores probably, and that a q6600 or better is PLENTY sufficient to run any game out there. Also, certain applications (Adobe CS3, a bunch of 3d modelling software and video editing software, etc.) run better on quad core.

If you can afford it, you may as well get a fast quadcore. But if you want to maximize your money spent for gaming: the dual cores will give you more spped per dollar.

psssh


Raw power go with the quad and that way you are set for the future or the next upcoming year when games start using all 4 cores.

I look on new egg and see the E8400 for $194.
Good price I guess.

Some people are stuck out because they dont have a micro center in their town.
You cannot beat a quad core q6600 for $199

If you are gonna upgrade get the new stuff the Quads.

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

Originally Posted by jason_jinx

psssh


Raw power go with the quad and that way you are set for the future or the next upcoming year when games start using all 4 cores.

I look on new egg and see the E8400 for $194.
Good price I guess.

Some people are stuck out because they dont have a micro center in their town.
You cannot beat a quad core q6600 for $199

If you are gonna upgrade get the new stuff the Quads.

Says the man who sold off his wife and first born to pay for his rig. This really doesnt have anything to do with the topic at hand, I just want to rag on jason...carry on.

the pc never says no at night

having smoken sherriff's quad core made a HUGE gain on 3dMark CPU scores.....however little of that translates into true deal FPS increases.....

at least for now......

just like dualcores are a must have for high-end gaming systems these days....quad's will be where it's at soon enough. Especially on 64-bit platforms......soon enough.

so, if you are gonna buy a chip........I'd buy the quad. the Q6750 is a bit highe clock than the q6600, and not much more.