Dual vs. Single Question

Status
Not open for further replies.

sickness

In Runtime
Messages
458
Okay, I'm sure I'm going to get a bunch of flameing for this.

I've read on numerous threads that single core has the advantage in games over the dual core. Lets say I have a 2.2 GHz single core, and a 2.2 GHz dual core.

AMD 64 3700+ SD
AMD X2 4400+ Toledo

Games that don't support dual core will run the game at 2.2GHz, correct? The same speed the single core 3700+ will run it at. Would the difference in L1 cache change any performance? We're talking 64 vs. 128.

I ask this because I basiclly got a free X2 4400+ and I'm convinced that it will run single core games just like a 3700+ CPU would, if not better due to the extra L1 Cache.
 
Well sure the single core might be faster but You can get pathces for dual core and plus in the future dual core will be optimized more in other games so I suggest if you have the money go dual...
 
it'll run it virtually the same. It's virtually 2 3700's... There's probably a few unmentionable differences...

Where in SAM **** did you get a free 4400+? Makes me really mad when I meet people like you... no offense

Ryan
 
Unknown Envy said:
Well sure the single core might be faster but You can get pathces for dual core and plus in the future dual core will be optimized more in other games so I suggest if you have the money go dual...

The single core isn't faster. If you compare the two CPUs, the dual core has the advange due to the 2nd core and the larger L1 cache.

Or is this like comparing Apples to Oranges?

FghtinIrshNvrDi said:
it'll run it virtually the same. It's virtually 2 3700's... There's probably a few unmentionable differences...

Where in SAM **** did you get a free 4400+? Makes me really mad when I meet people like you... no offense

Ryan

I traded laptops with a guy and he agreed to send me a 4400+ and a eVGA 7800GTX. Just waiting for some money so I can purchase a motherboard, ram, and a PSU and I'll have an awesome gaming machine.
 
Yeah the 4400+ would be better than the 3700+ in single core applications, and obviously dual core. I have no idea how well a 4400+ overclocks but that's a pretty sweet deal you got there.
 
Many people fail to realize that regardless of which CPU is better at gaming, there really a recent processor in the past two or three years that would really show noticable performance differences between any other processor in that timeframe

Take for example, four machines, shove one with a 3000+, one with an FX-57, one with an x2 3800+ and one with a FX-60, and put everything together with identical specs and get someone to play on all four. Chances are without fraps or another framerate counter present, they wouldn't be able to identify which computer is faster. That is quite frankly because games have little reliance on the CPU for raw power and the difference between the low end of the spectrum and the high would be around 10FPS at the most, and so long as your framerate is smooth to begin with, it's not something you're going to notice.

So, to give you a conclusion. A single core processor is the most cost effective of the bunch out there and is very capable of running anything nearly as well as higher end of the spectrum, therefore if you are tight on cash or want the best price for the performance, buy a 3000+. If you have a little more money to spend and want a bit of a more powerful core that can handle multiple loads better and will in turn only become more powerful overtime, get a 3800+
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom