for the same price which is better overall (games, compiling programs, watching movies, multitasking, etc.) won't really be doing video editing or converting much so would I actually benifit from a quad core or should I just stick with the dual.
Reasons for buying: I have an e6600 right now that will be going into another system will also be upgrading to 4gbs of ram along with the new chip.
_________________ I have now been banned twice. Do not mess with me. Also, you suck.
Joined: Sun 08-15-2004 9:36PM Posts: 4957 Location: ~~~~\o/~~~~~
Source: MST-PSK Wireless
I'm loving the q6600 with the stock cooler and there is a lot of room for OC'ing with all the awesome heatsinks out there. There should be charts out to compare the two.
I'm loving the q6600 with the stock cooler and there is a lot of room for OC'ing with all the awesome heatsinks out there. There should be charts out to compare the two.
There are, and it is totally based on what I want to use it for. The quad core seems more practical for getting a small advantage on day to day processes but if I want to get a little bit more out of my games for the same price the E8500 overclocked a bit (4.1 in a lot of benches) beats out multicore with sheer speed. I am torn. I will probably end up going with the quad.
LB, what speed are you running yours at? I have a pretty nice cooler so I would probably just crank mine up as high it can go on default voltage and be done with it.
_________________ I have now been banned twice. Do not mess with me. Also, you suck.
Joined: Mon 08-14-2006 3:02PM Posts: 715 Location: Off Campus FTW
Source: MST-WPA Wireless
Right now an 8500 would probably be better for games because the overclocking can just be ridiculous, 4.0 easy. Which is better for games currently. But if you are looking into a future a Q6600 would be better because it can easily get to 3.4 and more and more games are coming out that can use all 4 cores. Really depends on how long you are keeping it.
I don't really see myself keeping it as a primary computer for more than a year or two tops. I pretty much only spend money on rent and computer parts so I like to stay at least somewhat current. I think I will go with the q6600 anyway.
_________________ I have now been banned twice. Do not mess with me. Also, you suck.
Joined: Sun 10-19-2003 6:38PM Posts: 418 Location: here and there at the same time
Source: Fidelity
i dont have either, but based on the testing and reviews from hardware sites i visit on a normal basis, you'd be better off with the E8500 as the quad cores aren't really utilized well unless you're doing photo or video editing. And, as was previously stated, the OC potential is quite high... And also, as of now, not many applications are coded or optimized for more than 2 cores... So my vote would be for the 8500.. for now... Nehalem isn't far off and i think i read somewhere that AMD is supposed to be releasing their 45nm quad core parts by the end of the year.
_________________ NN - "ninja's dont pillage and rape women like pirates do."
Me - "sure they do. they just rape asian women."
i dont have either, but based on the testing and reviews from hardware sites i visit on a normal basis, you'd be better off with the E8500 as the quad cores aren't really utilized well unless you're doing photo or video editing. And, as was previously stated, the OC potential is quite high... And also, as of now, not many applications are coded or optimized for more than 2 cores... So my vote would be for the 8500.. for now... Nehalem isn't far off and i think i read somewhere that AMD is supposed to be releasing their 45nm quad core parts by the end of the year.
Overall, I'd agree for most individuals but I think in Jeff's case the quadcore would be better.
He's a compsci and many compiling programs are being rewritten to take advantage of multiple cores, so for him its quite possible the quad core would be better. Yeah the e8500 would be better for gaming, but 3-4 years from now it won't really matter if he has a faster dual core or a slower quad core since they'd both be mediocre compared to future processors. Also he'd have to be gaming heavily to make that speed more worthwhile, but I think there are times when we all wish we had more cores.
_________________
BigPeeOn wrote:
Here's the deal: chemistry is the devil. Anything beyond balancing an chemical equation is black magic.
Joined: Mon 08-14-2006 3:02PM Posts: 715 Location: Off Campus FTW
Source: Off Campus
amd2800barton wrote:
[4N]Static wrote:
i dont have either, but based on the testing and reviews from hardware sites i visit on a normal basis, you'd be better off with the E8500 as the quad cores aren't really utilized well unless you're doing photo or video editing. And, as was previously stated, the OC potential is quite high... And also, as of now, not many applications are coded or optimized for more than 2 cores... So my vote would be for the 8500.. for now... Nehalem isn't far off and i think i read somewhere that AMD is supposed to be releasing their 45nm quad core parts by the end of the year.
Overall, I'd agree for most individuals but I think in Jeff's case the quadcore would be better.
He's a compsci and many compiling programs are being rewritten to take advantage of multiple cores, so for him its quite possible the quad core would be better. Yeah the e8500 would be better for gaming, but 3-4 years from now it won't really matter if he has a faster dual core or a slower quad core since they'd both be mediocre compared to future processors. Also he'd have to be gaming heavily to make that speed more worthwhile, but I think there are times when we all wish we had more cores.
I find the current situation very similar to when I bought my 4200 X2 back in 2006, everybody was like "OMG get a single core they clock better" but I definitely think that dual core was the way to go.
Well I am still waiting for the 400ish bucks my roommate owes me...although I think right now I am leaning more on grabbing a 24" monitor in light of all the TV shows starting new seasons. I am so torn...
_________________ I have now been banned twice. Do not mess with me. Also, you suck.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum