Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 21

Thread: Quad or Dual

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    271
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    7 times in 7 posts
    • ikix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit iX38 Quad-GT
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 (OC to 3.0GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 4GB Corsair XMS2
      • Storage:
      • 640GB WD, 320GB Seagate, 160GB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte HD 4870
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX620
      • Case:
      • P182
      • Operating System:
      • Vista x64 Home Premium
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2009WFP

    Quad or Dual

    This may be a helpful thread for others to read through as well as for myself

    With Dual Cores now the mainstream and the Quad Cores the upcoming, which one to get? With very few games making much use of multiple cores is it worth getting a Quad Core?

    Basically looking for an answer on the following question (yes, you may say WTF was i just reading then). Would it be better to get a Quad Core or a Dual Core CPU for a gaming pc, baring in mind that it is to last a some time (2-3 years) and hence more games may take advantage of multiple cores?

    The problems I have been thinking in my head are that generally for the same price Dual Cores are faster and hence if a game does not take advantage of multiple cores the Dual Core is a better choice, but with more developers likely to take advantage of those extra cores will that extra clock speed in a dual core still be better down the line. Also, despite a gaming rig being the primary concern, in standard usage will the same apply, i.e. will the faster Dual Core beat a slower Quad Core? On top of that subject as well will any difference be noticable enough that, again despite being a gaming rig, standard computer use be accounted for in a purchase.

    Hopefully that has made some sense to you guys and hopefully this might not only clear things for me but others as well

  2. #2
    Yeah dude! NightshadowUK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Bolton
    Posts
    2,172
    Thanks
    134
    Thanked
    59 times in 57 posts
    • NightshadowUK's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI Z87M GAMING
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i7 4790K [Macho Rev.B]
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LP
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M500 [240GB] & MX500 [1TB]
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 4GB Sapphire 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • 620W Corsair HX
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08B-E [AP181 & NF-S12B]
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Home [64bit]
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2412M
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 200Mb

    Re: Quad or Dual

    If you're building a system that you don't plan on upgrading for a good while then obviously, get a quad core.

    However, as it stands you'll see zero difference between a modern dual core and a quad core in terms of fps, as neither will be a bottleneck - it's all about the graphics card. This'll no doubt change in coming years though, as games continue to become more and more demanding.

  3. #3
    WEEEEEEEEEEEEE! MadduckUK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lytham St. Annes
    Posts
    17,297
    Thanks
    653
    Thanked
    1,580 times in 1,006 posts
    • MadduckUK's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 5 3600
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200 DDR4
      • Storage:
      • 1x480GB SSD, 1x 2TB Hybrid, 1x 3TB Rust Spinner
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon 5700XT
      • PSU:
      • Corsair TX750w
      • Case:
      • Phanteks Enthoo Evolv mATX
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung SJ55W, DELL S2409W
      • Internet:
      • Plusnet 80

    Re: Quad or Dual

    yep quad. then you can fold for hexus really fast
    Quote Originally Posted by Ephesians
    Do not be drunk with wine, which will ruin you, but be filled with the Spirit
    Vodka

  4. Received thanks from:

    NightshadowUK (01-03-2008)

  5. #4
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    54
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • KiMi-Tech's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit IP35 - Pro
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz @1.41v
      • Memory:
      • 4 Gb Crucial Ballistix 6400 DDR2 @ 975Mhz
      • Storage:
      • 2x250Gb + 2x400Gb Western Digital
      • Graphics card(s):
      • BFG 8800GTS 640mb @ 621mHz + Zalman vf 1000
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX 520w
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ09
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG226 WTQ + Viewsoinc VP171s

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Quad all the way

  6. #5
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Quad or Dual

    I would stick with a cheaper dual core such as an Intel E2*** or E4*** series processor and overclock it. The price of quad cores is going to drop and you can use the money saved to upgrade to a quad core when you really need it. It would be not suprising if in the next 12 months tri or quad core processors fall to a similiar price as the dual cores today.

  7. #6
    Chillie in here j.o.s.h.1408's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    a place called home
    Posts
    8,545
    Thanks
    757
    Thanked
    256 times in 193 posts
    • j.o.s.h.1408's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P6T Delux
      • CPU:
      • Intel core i7 920 @ 3ghz
      • Memory:
      • 3GB DDR RAM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung F1, 500GB Seagate baracuda + 320gb Seagate PATA +150GB WD PATA
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 480GTX SC edition
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 600W Module PSU FTW
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-A7010B (the rolls royce of pc cases)
      • Operating System:
      • vista ultimate edition and windows xp
      • Monitor(s):
      • 22inch 2005FPW dell monitor
      • Internet:
      • 24mb BE There Broadband

    Re: Quad or Dual

    also take into consideration that nelan will arrive soon but you wont be able to upgrade to that because it needs a new socket altogether

  8. #7
    Lover & Fighter Blitzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Between Your Mum & Sister
    Posts
    6,310
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked
    382 times in 300 posts
    • Blitzen's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ABIT iX38 QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz : 30 Degrees Idle - 41-46 Degrees Load
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400 @ 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints - RAID 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 285
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU 82+ 625W
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic Q22wb 22" Widescreen - 5ms
      • Internet:
      • O2 premium @ 17mb

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Any QUAD will have a longer lifespan than any dual core.

    The Quad will still be used when the Dual cores are old hat.

  9. #8
    Cute Member Hunain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    *Under the HeatSink*
    Posts
    827
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    23 times in 21 posts
    • Hunain's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5k-Vm G33 1333Fsb
      • CPU:
      • Intel C2D e6300 3.0Ghz
      • Memory:
      • Corsair XMS2 Oc'd 914mhz - 1Gb x 2
      • Storage:
      • SeaGate 160Gb HDD 7,200rpm , 40GB HDD 7,200rpm
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX GTX260 Black Edition Overclocked
      • PSU:
      • Cooler Master Silent Pro M600
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master CM690II Plus
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8
      • Monitor(s):
      • Philips 15" LCD
      • Internet:
      • 1024kbps WiMAX Wireless Broadband

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Yeah, I think a quad would be the better choice, but yes, a faster dual core will beat a slower quad core, as long as the application being tested uses two cores, when it uses four cores, the slower quad will leap ahead, as for lasting 2 - 3 years, I think dual cores might last long enough in terms of giving performance, specially if you over clock them, but yes a Quad would be a better bet.
    Homer Simpson: "It takes two to lie Marge. One to lie, and one to listen"
    Check out my Tech Blogs: Budget Gaming Rigs and The Droid Review

  10. #9
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Quad or Dual

    I personally do not think that a quad core processors is worth £80 to £100 more than a E2180 or E4300 which you can clock at least to 3ghz in most cases. When games will start really needing quad core processors the current ones will not be that fast in comparison to what will be available. Quad cores will drop to the price of budget dual cores just like dual cores did. Look at all the people who bought the 8800GTS 320mb and 640mb in anticipation of Crysis for instance!

  11. #10
    Senior Member this_is_gav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,854
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked
    255 times in 217 posts

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Not worth more than a E2180 for Joe Average, but it depends entirely on what you're doing. If you're a casual gamer with fairly standard production uses, then a E2180 won't be inferior to a Q6600 and likely won't lead much less of a life (in terms of performance before 'needing' an upgrade) than one either. If you're a hard-core gamer or more likely a number-cruncher or frequently edit videos then you'd have to be a nut-case not to go quad. Using Adobe Premier Pro CS3 to export a HDR panto-recording as an example, my E6600 took 7 hours export to DVD-format. My Q6600 (at the same 3.0GHz as the E6600 was) takes 4hrs. I'd estimate an E2180 at 3.0GHz to take around 10hrs. For the record my old 4400 X2 at work (now replaced by the E6600) took 26hrs for the same job!! All of a sudden the quad is exceptional value...

    It's totally dependant on usage.

  12. #11
    Lover & Fighter Blitzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Between Your Mum & Sister
    Posts
    6,310
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked
    382 times in 300 posts
    • Blitzen's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ABIT iX38 QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz : 30 Degrees Idle - 41-46 Degrees Load
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400 @ 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints - RAID 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 285
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU 82+ 625W
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic Q22wb 22" Widescreen - 5ms
      • Internet:
      • O2 premium @ 17mb

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    I personally do not think that a quad core processors is worth £80 to £100 more than a E2180 or E4300 which you can clock at least to 3ghz in most cases. When games will start really needing quad core processors the current ones will not be that fast in comparison to what will be available. Quad cores will drop to the price of budget dual cores just like dual cores did. Look at all the people who bought the 8800GTS 320mb and 640mb in anticipation of Crysis for instance!
    You are totally missing the point of a Quad Core Processor.
    No one has said it will be fully utilised playing games. The Dual arent so by you method of thought, a dual core is a waste of time aswell.

    The purpose of a Quad Core is to multi-task, and they do that exceptionally well. This may include gaming but its by no means limited to it.

    Example: I was playing BF2 the other day whilst encoding a DVD. It sailed through where that would be the absolute limit of any top end dual core and probably too much for the low end ones you suggest to even struggle through.

    SOme of these E***series CPU's are touching £200 atm. There is no way on this earth that they are better value than a Q6600.

    BTW...When you say E4300, thats still about £80 isnt it? I only paid £125 for my Quad. Surely you accept that for £45 extra, that was definitely the better purchase.

  13. #12
    Senior Member this_is_gav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,854
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked
    255 times in 217 posts

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzen View Post
    BTW...When you say E4300, thats still about £80 isnt it? I only paid £125 for my Quad. Surely you accept that for £45 extra, that was definitely the better purchase.
    It's now more than double. Still dependant on the task at hand, but it's quite a gap.

  14. #13
    Cute Member Hunain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    *Under the HeatSink*
    Posts
    827
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    23 times in 21 posts
    • Hunain's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5k-Vm G33 1333Fsb
      • CPU:
      • Intel C2D e6300 3.0Ghz
      • Memory:
      • Corsair XMS2 Oc'd 914mhz - 1Gb x 2
      • Storage:
      • SeaGate 160Gb HDD 7,200rpm , 40GB HDD 7,200rpm
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX GTX260 Black Edition Overclocked
      • PSU:
      • Cooler Master Silent Pro M600
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master CM690II Plus
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8
      • Monitor(s):
      • Philips 15" LCD
      • Internet:
      • 1024kbps WiMAX Wireless Broadband

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzen View Post
    You are totally missing the point of a Quad Core Processor.
    No one has said it will be fully utilised playing games. The Dual arent so by you method of thought, a dual core is a waste of time aswell.

    The purpose of a Quad Core is to multi-task, and they do that exceptionally well. This may include gaming but its by no means limited to it. - Correct

    Example: I was playing BF2 the other day whilst encoding a DVD. It sailed through where that would be the absolute limit of any top end dual core and probably too much for the low end ones you suggest to even struggle through. - Correct,ive tried this, a 3rd Task gets in the waiting line sort of

    SOme of these E***series CPU's are touching £200 atm. There is no way on this earth that they are better value than a Q6600. - Correct

    BTW...When you say E4300, thats still about £80 isnt it? I only paid £125 for my Quad. Surely you accept that for £45 extra, that was definitely the better purchase. - Correct again
    Hence, i am now convinced, I was thinking of getting an e2xxx for a 2nd PC, i think i might go quad (if i save enough)
    Homer Simpson: "It takes two to lie Marge. One to lie, and one to listen"
    Check out my Tech Blogs: Budget Gaming Rigs and The Droid Review

  15. #14
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Quad or Dual

    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzen View Post
    You are totally missing the point of a Quad Core Processor.
    No one has said it will be fully utilised playing games. The Dual arent so by you method of thought, a dual core is a waste of time aswell.

    The purpose of a Quad Core is to multi-task, and they do that exceptionally well. This may include gaming but its by no means limited to it.

    Example: I was playing BF2 the other day whilst encoding a DVD. It sailed through where that would be the absolute limit of any top end dual core and probably too much for the low end ones you suggest to even struggle through.

    SOme of these E***series CPU's are touching £200 atm. There is no way on this earth that they are better value than a Q6600.

    BTW...When you say E4300, thats still about £80 isnt it? I only paid £125 for my Quad. Surely you accept that for £45 extra, that was definitely the better purchase.
    Where did you get an Intel quad for £125?? I assume it was new?? For that price it would be worth it. A new Q6600 now usually costs at least £150 plus the cost of a cooler. That is a over a £70 difference. My E4500 at 3ghz is good enough for most things.ll A E2180 costs under £60 and can also hit 3ghz most times. This is a £90 difference. This will contribute towards a graphics cards which makes more difference for gaming anyway! Most of the gaming public do not even have a 3ghz Core2 dual core - let alone a quad core!! Hence at least for a year most people will be fine as games companies want sales and not everything will be a tech demo like Crysis was!

    I thought this thread was about gaming also?! My whole point is that it is better to upgrade every 18 months rather than spend twice the amount on a system and expect to last three years. Just think how a high end gaming system three years ago would fare today against a mid range system upgraded every 18 months??

    If I wanted to encode a DVD or something like that I would do it overnight in a batch job or let it run through the day while I had other things to do. Most people I know also have more than one computer probably so it is a moot point really. I also have no need to game and encode a DVD at the same time?? I do not do much rendering also. The only software that I definitely know which makes really good use of quad cores is some scientific software which is written specifically to take advantage of multiple processors. such as image deconvolution software for example.

    Wait a year and a faster quad core will cost the same as the E4300/E4500. I have see the quad core Phenoms for around £110-£120 for a while so it is only a matter of time until both AMD and Intel quad cores drop to well under £100. The AMD tri-cores also are reported to be reasonably priced too.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 02-03-2008 at 04:07 PM.

  16. #15
    Chillie in here j.o.s.h.1408's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    a place called home
    Posts
    8,545
    Thanks
    757
    Thanked
    256 times in 193 posts
    • j.o.s.h.1408's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P6T Delux
      • CPU:
      • Intel core i7 920 @ 3ghz
      • Memory:
      • 3GB DDR RAM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung F1, 500GB Seagate baracuda + 320gb Seagate PATA +150GB WD PATA
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 480GTX SC edition
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 600W Module PSU FTW
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-A7010B (the rolls royce of pc cases)
      • Operating System:
      • vista ultimate edition and windows xp
      • Monitor(s):
      • 22inch 2005FPW dell monitor
      • Internet:
      • 24mb BE There Broadband

    Re: Quad or Dual

    but on your dual core can you play games without turning off anti virus scanning, encoding some video ? dont think so. i like to do many different tasks in my pc. encoding a movie takes a couple of hours and i do not wish to leave my pc on during the night to do it. i rather do it now while browsing hexus and playing a game or two

  17. #16
    Yeah dude! NightshadowUK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Bolton
    Posts
    2,172
    Thanks
    134
    Thanked
    59 times in 57 posts
    • NightshadowUK's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI Z87M GAMING
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i7 4790K [Macho Rev.B]
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LP
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M500 [240GB] & MX500 [1TB]
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 4GB Sapphire 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • 620W Corsair HX
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08B-E [AP181 & NF-S12B]
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Home [64bit]
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2412M
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 200Mb

    Re: Quad or Dual

    I understand what 'Cat' is saying, I've just bought an E4500 (£73) as part of my upgrade with the intention of running it at 3GHz+ until such time as I require a quad. And by then I'll be able to pick up a cheap Q9xxx chip and just drop it in.

    But going back to what I said originally, if you don't want to upgrade for a good few years then it only makes sense to get a quad core.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 484
    Last Post: 12-03-2008, 08:17 PM
  2. SMP - Quad vs Dual core
    By Agent in forum Software
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 17-12-2007, 12:58 AM
  3. Dual vs Quad Article
    By shaithis in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-09-2007, 12:29 PM
  4. Future Dual / Quad Core Build
    By dbh in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20-06-2007, 08:18 PM
  5. Dual or Quad Core AMD
    By RufusKing in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 18-12-2005, 10:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •