Is the Duel Core still worth buying?

[zaphox]

Hi,

I'm about to get together a new system and thought the CPU was the first choice to make. I don't want to spend a fortune, so was thinking about an AMD Duel Core.. maybe this one:

Computer hardware and software at amazing prices, available online from Scan Computers UK

Housing it in this MOBO (I take it an AM2 can fit in an AM2+ socket?):

Computer hardware and software at amazing prices, available online from Scan Computers UK

What's the opinion on Duel Core, are they fast/reliable? Is it worth spending extra for a Quad Core?

Any help is appreciated.

[aidanjt]

Hi,

I'm about to get together a new system and thought the CPU was the first choice to make. I don't want to spend a fortune, so was thinking about an AMD Duel Core.. maybe this one:

Computer hardware and software at amazing prices, available online from Scan Computers UK

Housing it in this MOBO (I take it an AM2 can fit in an AM2+ socket?):

Computer hardware and software at amazing prices, available online from Scan Computers UK

What's the opinion on Duel Core, are they fast/reliable? Is it worth spending extra for a Quad Core?

Any help is appreciated.

Dual core is still more than adequate for most tasks. And yes, AM2 CPUs can fit in an AM2+ motherboard.

[Saracen]

As an AMD fan, personally, I'd be looking at Intel right now. They seem to represent better value for money at the moment .... unless you already have the motherboard.

As for dual versus Quad, right now, there isn't much that takes advantage of quad core, in that there aren't many apps written to properly use multiple cores. If you happen to have one of those that does, that might be the best bet.

But otherwise, the way I see it is that it's a pretty close call. In many respects, dual core will give you higher performance in many ways, and at the same budget, than Quad. So if you're running something particularly demanding on the processor, maybe go dual, but if you're running several major apps simultaneously (like a large database search and large print job, while editing photos in Photoshop) then quadcore will probably help more than a slightly faster dual core.

But, and this is a personal opinion that some will probably disagree with, in terms of real world effect on performance, there isn't much to chose between. So a Q6600 is a good choice for a rock-solid quad, but an E8400 dual core is going to give similar levels of real world performance .... though I'm sure you can benchmark difference.

The Q6600 probably future proofs a bit better, on the basis that apps that will use four cores will, presumably, be coming along. Eventually. Or the smaller die size, power usage and heat profile of the E8400 has benefits right now.

Of course, if you want AMD for a reason, please ignore all of he above.

[kalniel]

I often let my cores fight each other.

But duels aside Saracen's post is what I'd say as well - any games that seem to be CPU limited tend to be speed limited rather than number of cores limited.

[ikix]

Generally the way i see it (regarding the Q6600, since its price is reasonable enough to make a fair enough comparison) if you are wanting to keep your processor for a long time then go quad but if you are going to be upgrading not too long after then go dual core. Keeping in mind that atm intel seems to be the better option and they will release nehalem near the end of this year.

[SiM]

[Noxvayl]

As an AMD fan, personally, I'd be looking at Intel right now. They seem to represent better value for money at the moment .... unless you already have the motherboard.

As for dual versus Quad, right now, there isn't much that takes advantage of quad core, in that there aren't many apps written to properly use multiple cores. If you happen to have one of those that does, that might be the best bet.

But otherwise, the way I see it is that it's a pretty close call. In many respects, dual core will give you higher performance in many ways, and at the same budget, than Quad. So if you're running something particularly demanding on the processor, maybe go dual, but if you're running several major apps simultaneously (like a large database search and large print job, while editing photos in Photoshop) then quadcore will probably help more than a slightly faster dual core.

But, and this is a personal opinion that some will probably disagree with, in terms of real world effect on performance, there isn't much to chose between. So a Q6600 is a good choice for a rock-solid quad, but an E8400 dual core is going to give similar levels of real world performance .... though I'm sure you can benchmark difference.

The Q6600 probably future proofs a bit better, on the basis that apps that will use four cores will, presumably, be coming along. Eventually. Or the smaller die size, power usage and heat profile of the E8400 has benefits right now.

Of course, if you want AMD for a reason, please ignore all of he above.

I agree and in fact believe that Dual cores run games better than quad cores because they are able to run the game with far less heat being emitted which naturally means better efficiency.

Quads are only useful if you run multiple applications while you are gaming or using PhotoShop and other similar apps. Basically Quads are for the person who wants to do everything at once, Dual cores are for gamers who aren't bothered about closing apps before starting a game.

As for AMD vs Intel yeah Intel are better with the higher performance spec but AMD are still good for average users. If you intend to crossfire 2 lower end GFX cards like 2 HD3850's then the AMD chipset is better as there is almost 50% better performance on the AMD chipset as opposed to the Intel one.

[staffsMike]

I would only buy a dual core for a budget build now, people suggest the e8400 is better for games which I'm sure it is but it's like comparing the gold and silver winners in an olympic race... they both do the job very very well. In terms of the Q6600 it does game very well and does everything else even better

[SiM]

I would only buy a dual core for a budget build now, people suggest the e8400 is better for games which I'm sure it is but it's like comparing the gold and silver winners in an olympic race... they both do the job very very well. In terms of the Q6600 it does game very well and does everything else even better

That is the best analogy yet!
If you want gold in gaming/single thread apps and silver in everything else get the Dual and clock to 4ghz+
If you want silver in gaming and gold in multi threaded apps or multi tasking get the Quad and clock to 3.6ghz+

[zaphox]

ok that's great, thanks for the replies.

It seems almost too good to be true that I can get a Duel Core AMD chip for about £50 inc VAT, yet I notice the Intel chips are generally well over the £100 mark. Is there a reason for this?

I've already got a pretty nice AM2/939/754 Zalman heatsink/fan that I was hoping to use but if the Intels are much better I may reconsider.

[vmong]

Dual core are probably good for peopel who do not demand much power. i personally would not invest in a dual core IF it was just a computer for school work etc. however if its a computer for a few years then i would get a Core2, they have better efficiency

[kalniel]

ok that's great, thanks for the replies.

It seems almost too good to be true that I can get a Duel Core AMD chip for about £50 inc VAT, yet I notice the Intel chips are generally well over the £100 mark. Is there a reason for this?

More pistols at dawn!

But yes, there is a reason - Intel chips are much much faster. But AMD is a good budget choice.

[zaphox]

*steps into the light* heh ok I'll stop calling them duel core now

Intel it is... damn there goes another £100

[staffsMike]

Actually you can get intel dual cores (pentium dual cores as they are reffered to) for £40 ish and they overclock to around 3.0GHz if you are interested in overclocking

I actually run an brisbane core AMD X2 and think its a fantastic chip for the money. Overclock nicely to 3.0GHz and matches my e6600 in most of my day to day stuff.

[Thorsson]

If you're on a very tight budget re CPU, mobo & RAM, and won't be able to afford much of an upgrade for some time, then AMD is a good choice. If you are fairly tight but may be able to upgrade in 18 months then get a C2D Dual. If you're less tight now, but won't be able to upgrade for more than 2 years get a C2D Quad.

Whatever get 4Gb RAM now (unless you're prepared to monitor prices regularly and will be able to take action when things change), coz there's no guarantee that DDR2 prices will stay this low - they will certainly go up when DDR3 prices start to come down and it becomes the memory of choice.

[looney]

e7200 and p35 mobo, failing that you get cheaper e2180 and oc