mnelson07
In Runtime
- Messages
- 349
- Location
- Denton, TX
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there will be another, much better, quad core processor on the market for about the same price you bought the, now outdated quad core processor.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.
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.