Dual vs. Quad - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 09-20-2007, 09:04 AM   #1 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
mnelson07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 349
Default Dual vs. Quad

Sorry to bring this up again, but I think I'm going to make a valid point that I haven't seen yet in this debate.

I'm preparing to buy a new computer; as I was putting together a wish list on Newegg, I started to ponder about Quad vs. Dual and it's pros and cons.

The Q6600 is obviously a great processor hands down. But most decent dual cores tend to beat it. Now, this isn't the processor's fault since no (not many at least) game or applications utilizes four cores. Because of this two cores are just waiting to be "unleashed" and has excess power. Even so it still performs almost just as well as the dual core so most people think, "similar price, about same performance, plus two more cores to make it more futureproof."

That makes sense, but what about this; since quad cores really aren't being utilized currently, go dual core. Use up both cores to their advantage and outperform a quadcore. Sure you won't have the futureproof two extra cores, but you get what you pay for. Unless of course you are doing audio/video editing in which case the obvious choice is the quad core. But from my experience on these forums, most people simply game. My major debate on this side is this: By the time quad cores become more streamlined in games and applications and will actually utilize them, there will be another, much better, quad core processor on the market for about the same price you bought the, now outdated quad core processor.

In conclusion, buy a dual core and get the most out of it. Wait for quad cores to become utilized, the technology to increase, and then buy a better performing, cheaper quad core.
__________________

mnelson07 is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 09:25 AM   #2 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 175
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

Who says a Dual Core will outperform a Q6600. With a G0 it's not too hard to push it to 3.6 or the like.

Of course let us not forget the Cache size difference.
__________________

Raziel-Zero is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 09:28 AM   #3 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
mnelson07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 349
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raziel-Zero View Post
Who says a Dual Core will outperform a Q6600. With a G0 it's not too hard to push it to 3.6 or the like.

Of course let us not forget the Cache size difference.
Let's say without overclocking.
mnelson07 is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 09:51 AM   #4 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 412
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

When you run mulitple applications at once (active Virus Scanner, Mp3 player, IE, Photoshop) will it do processing on more than one core per application if needed, even though a single application it self will not use more than one core?

Edit:

Quote:
Even without a multithread-enabled application, you will still see benefits of dual-core processors if you are running an OS that supports TLP. For example, if you have Microsoft Windows XP (which supports multithreading), you could have your Internet browser open along with a virus scanner running in the background, while using Windows Media Player to stream your favorite radio station and the dual-core processor will handle the multiple threads of these programs running simultaneously with an increase in performance and efficiency.
Now this talks about dual cores, but it applies just as well to the quad cores.
__________________
Case: COOLER MASTER Centurion 5
Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3R
CPU: Intel Core Duo E6750 2.66GHz @ 3.2GHz
GPU: EVGA GeForce 8800GTS 320MB
PSU: CORSAIR CMPSU-520HX 520W
RAM: G.SKILL 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800
(RIP) HDD 1: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB
HDD 1: Western Digital Caviar Blue 320 GB
HDD 2: Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 500GB
HDD 3: Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB
HS: ARCTIC COOLING Freezer 7 Pro 92mm CPU Cooler
OS: Windows XP 32 Bit Home :rolleyes:
Audio: Maya1010 Pci with Breakout Box
BlueHeaven is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 09:59 AM   #5 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
mnelson07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 349
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueHeaven View Post
When you run mulitple applications at once (active Virus Scanner, Mp3 player, IE, Photoshop) will it do processing on more than one core per application if needed, even though a single application it self will not use more than one core?

Edit:



Now this talks about dual cores, but it applies just as well to the quad cores.
I don't believe a quad core would outperform a dual core in this instance. I don't think it takes four cores to utilize all of those applications. Sure, you listed four (very conveniently) but that doesn't mean that each affinity automatically takes one task, unless of course you manually set it. It would pretty much take one core, two maybe to run all of those processes at the same time.
mnelson07 is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 10:00 AM   #6 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Pdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: American in Hong Kong
Posts: 383
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

Quote:
Originally Posted by mnelson07 View Post
Let's say without overclocking.
No let's not say without overclocking. If most people on this forum didn't overclock then they'd have to rename it noob-forums.net or delluser-forum.net or something equally as silly.

Besides, yeah, alot of people on this forum game heavily. If I can beat alot of similair systems in the gaming sense of things with the only difference being their duals and my quad then it can't be hard cuz I'm certainly no pro. I'm not saying that to be a braggard or anything either, just ponting out an example.
__________________

3dMark06 = 13,687
Futuremark - ORB - Project Comparison
Antec 900 (Modded)
Q6600 G0 @ 3.3GHz (8multi x 413FSB; 1.3375v)
Asus P5K Deluxe
Tuniq Tower 120 (Lapped)
XFX 8800GTS @ 703/1,008 (ATItool)
2G Corsair XMS2 DDR2-826 2T 4-4-4-12
Seagate 7200.10 320G
LiteOn 20x DL DVD-Rw
Acbel 607W
Windows XP Pro 32bit
Pdawg is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 11:40 AM   #7 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
kobe24's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,508
Send a message via MSN to kobe24
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

how can u say that! maroon1 where r u!!! listen to this guy, ummm quad cores will better duals neday. quads are still way more effective by using four cores to run 4 single apps. higher 3dmark score and better for gaming. and yes the cache size is 8mb l2. y do u say buy it when apps take full advange of quads when most things r startin to already.
__________________
3D MARK 06 ***14,063*** on vista, use to get it
p4 2.8ghz
Asus p4SD-LA
6800gs ultra
1.5gb ddr400 oem
120gb hdd

The Techies' Bible
kobe24 is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 11:56 AM   #8 (permalink)
Future ex-member
 
lancec2c30's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chehalis, WA
Posts: 4,012
Send a message via MSN to lancec2c30
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

For the price, right now you can get better performance out of a dual-core cpu. But the 3dmark scores don't lie, 4 cores is better then 2.
__________________

XP Pro | Vista Home Premium | Linux Ubuntu 7.10
s939 X2 3800 Toledo @ 2.6ghz | evga 7900gs | 320gig + 80gig wd | 1gb Ram | Abit KN8 SLI
3.1ghz achieved. :cool:
70K F@H member..............still waiting for the "iRACK"

Norcent will not be forgotten.

lancec2c30 is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 12:03 PM   #9 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
kobe24's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,508
Send a message via MSN to kobe24
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

Quote:
Originally Posted by lancec2c30 View Post
For the price, right now you can get better performance out of a dual-core cpu. But the 3dmark scores don't lie, 4 cores is better then 2.
incorrect, u might be able to get a e6750 for $100 AUS less but the quad is worth goin the extra for sure way more performance.
__________________
3D MARK 06 ***14,063*** on vista, use to get it
p4 2.8ghz
Asus p4SD-LA
6800gs ultra
1.5gb ddr400 oem
120gb hdd

The Techies' Bible
kobe24 is offline  
Old 09-20-2007, 12:08 PM   #10 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,479
Default Re: Dual vs. Quad

The difference between the Quad core and Dual core is not much (clock speed wise), for example, E6750 is only 266MHz faster than Q6600. However in a few months when the games that utilize quad core like Crysis, HL2 episode 2 come out, quad-cores will improve gameplay alot.
__________________

maroon1 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dual Channel PC2-5300 beats Dual Channel PC2-6400? pinoy3000 New Systems | Building and Buying 8 09-14-2007 07:03 PM
dual corre vs quad core robina_80 New Systems | Building and Buying 1 07-23-2007 03:45 PM
quad 105w vs dual 65w OnlyCurious New Systems | Building and Buying 50 06-26-2007 04:54 PM
quad core vs. dual core.... same price... last motherboard for one... OnlyCurious New Systems | Building and Buying 4 06-25-2007 11:15 AM
AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 Dual Core Processor Utilities & Updates Osiris Overclocking and Modding 6 05-31-2007 01:41 PM



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.