Re: Single Core vs dual Core
It depends on what you want to do, and what applications you want to run. But generally, dual core is mainstream these days, more and more applications are using SMP programming techniques (games, and graphics drivers especially are becoming more dependant on dual core CPUs), but.. you can still chuck an X2 into your S939 motherboard and get a little more life out of your rig for the time being, if you're not prepared for a complete system overhaul at this time.
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
I went from an single core Opty @ 2.7Ghz to an X2 @ 2.6Ghz, very similar RAM speeds etc lost a few FPS in benchies such as Lost Coast!
Did some benches with both @ 2.6Ghz to & they were pretty equal, general Windows performance is noticabley better though!
Raw mhz wins out for a lot of apps/games but that IS changing & I'd hope Vista offers more benefits that XP does with another core.
If you're going to C2D though it'll destroy a 4000+ !
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
i'd go for quad core the e6750 is good but about £115 and if you shop about as i just did i got a B3 Q6600 for £137 brand new simply from looking about
but even with a dual core you will notice a good difference over your current cpu plus if you go intel overclocking potential is great.
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
it's not just about dual core - core2 is a very powerful cpu, even on single-threaded apps
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
If the core 2 duo was just a single core ( i know this defeats the point of it's name...) it would wipe the floow with your current cpu, couple that with the fact that it has 2 cores, it will further kick your current cpu's behind in muti threadded apps.
The ram won't bring about a huge increase to system performance, but the extra bandwidth can't hurt, but the main performance increase will come from your cpu.
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
..........just come across this while looking at the cheapest way to upgrade my 2nd computer as it's noisy and boring, and the AGP has blown :-
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...uad-q6600.html
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
Can you still buy Single core?
I think that the only way to get one will be ex stock or something.
Anyway if you can, the Athlon 64's are far better for gaming that the Intel P4 single cores, I am not a fan boy and have used both, to be honest though if you already have Athlon board and memory I would just get a duel core 4800 X2 Athlon this is as far as you can go really as an FX60 is just a waste of money over this.
just my two pennies worth :)
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Phillikon
Can you still buy Single core?
I think that the only way to get one will be ex stock or something.
Anyway if you can, the Athlon 64's are far better for gaming that the Intel P4 single cores, I am not a fan boy and have used both, to be honest though if you already have Athlon board and memory I would just get a duel core 4800 X2 Athlon this is as far as you can go really as an FX60 is just a waste of money over this.
just my two pennies worth :)
Yup, you can still buy Single core Athlon64. They are cheap as well from £15 in some places. Still a great cpu to use in a budget machine, esp if they overclock very well. (Both my Athlons OC past 2.7ghz on stock volts)
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Phillikon
Can you still buy Single core?
I think that the only way to get one will be ex stock or something.
Anyway if you can, the Athlon 64's are far better for gaming that the Intel P4 single cores, I am not a fan boy and have used both, to be honest though if you already have Athlon board and memory I would just get a duel core 4800 X2 Athlon this is as far as you can go really as an FX60 is just a waste of money over this.
just my two pennies worth :)
p4 is long dead though
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
Needless to say, when I bought my current system it blew my p4 2ghz with pc133 ram outa the water :P
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
Yeah, I considered going for the dual core S939 4800+, but that thing is expensive!
Well... less expensive than a full system upgrade, but relatively speaking, performance wise...
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shooty*
Yeah, I considered going for the dual core S939 4800+, but that thing is expensive!
Well... less expensive than a full system upgrade, but relatively speaking, performance wise...
I have one of these in a second machine at home, it is a blistering CPU and there is very little it can't handle even now.
I have noticed though that it too is getting harder to get hold of, you can still get the 4000 quite easily though.
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
just go back to XP and you'll get the speed you want ...back ;)
I went from S939 Opty at 2.4 to dual core S939 at 2.4 and it was really a good speed/power bump. Gaming was much better.
But Intel Quad is a vast, huge and massive leap from there again. And I now ave a quad and it's so fast it hurts :)
Re: Single Core vs dual Core
Single core...no market for this now really. Everything is dual core now. You can only buy a few cpus brand new single core now?