LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksMost current games do not use multiple cores. OTOH most current games will not be CPU limited at all. Our collective feeling is therefore that the Quad is both superior in other tasks and has more future proofing.
Most current games do not use multiple cores. OTOH most current games will not be CPU limited at all. Our collective feeling is therefore that the Quad is both superior in other tasks and has more future proofing.
Further to Thorosson points, when you factor in overclocking the two chips the dual starts to lose it's real advantage.
When you get above 3.0GHz on dual or quad cores you really have enough gaming power from the CPU, anything there after is a bonus really.
Where the E8500 might clock up to around 4.0GHz you need decent RAM, a decent motherboard and confidence that the 45nm chips can actually take it.
THe q6600 can quite easily take 3.4-3.6GHz all day long. It's not limited by RAM because at these speeds PC6400 is running at it's stock settings and the motherboard has much less strain on it as it itself is only being mildly overclocked.
Q6600 makes more sense long term and the differences right now are negligiable imo.
Ah, thanks very much for clearing that up.
Regarding operating systems, I am subscriped to the microsoft academic alliance so have free access to 32/64 bit XP and vista....
As a loyal XP man , I guess my question is "is it time to switch to vista yet" and if not "will it ever be time to switch to vista" and "64 or 32?"
Thanks again,
Kris
If you go with vista give 64bit a shot. Driver support is pretty good and it's not bad.
That said, I hate vista.. it ruins my laptop and XP is the way to go..especially if it's free.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote