2 cores or 4 cores

Discussion in 'polls' started by HURST, Apr 25, 2008.

?

dual or quad core?

  1. Dual Core

    89 vote(s)
    51.4%
  2. Quad Core

    84 vote(s)
    48.6%
  1. HURST

    HURST Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Posts:
    1,419
    Hi I was just wondering, is it worth it getting a quad-core instead of a really fast dual-core?

    I think faster and newer (quad) is better, but will one be able to fully use all it's capacity before the lifecycle (2-3 years) of a new computer is over??

    On the other hand, dual core can be cheaper and still be (and stay) very fast...

    So would you go for the extra cost of a quad-core or stay with a dual-core?
     
  2. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    Quad, even if its got lower GHz, its got 4.
    So if 2 core 4GHz each had it, it would provide 8GHz
    4 quad 4Ghz, it would be 16 Ghz
     
  3. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    Id go for quad-core if only cause of Folding@home :p

    BTW computer geek, you dont add the speeds of each core together. 4 cores x 4GHz doesnt not equal 16GHz.
     
  4. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I bought a 2 core processor to improve multi-tasking, not especially for speed.
    On my old computer, when my scheduled AV scanner was running, I felt a significant slowdown in my other applications, even my typing speed wasn't the same anymore.
    On my new computer, I didn't even notice my scanner was running.
    I guess a 4 core processor will probably improve multi-tasking even more than a 2 core.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2008
  5. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    Of course it don't, each core produces 4GHz, so if all the work is spread out equally, it should theoretically be working at 16GHz.
     
  6. mata7

    mata7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Posts:
    635
    Location:
    Mississauga, Canada
    i edit video allot and i love my 4 cores
     
  7. DigitalMan

    DigitalMan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2004
    Posts:
    90
    Have a quad - overall speed is more limited by disk access (even though its SATA300) than CPU. Unless you use a lot of applications simultaneously I don't think its worth the extra $ for the quad.
     
  8. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I have both and for every day computing by the average user a dual core would be a good and cheaper $ choice.
     
  9. sweater

    sweater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,674
    Location:
    Philippines, the Political Dynasty Capital of the
    Dual core if you are on a budget, but if you have the money to spent then I think Quad Cores is the best. Can you just imagined of a four muscle groups that works to run your pc? :D

    The higher the number of cores that it have the best the performance and power it could be. As simple as that. :cool:
     
  10. tradetime

    tradetime Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,000
    Location:
    UK
    Depends entirely on what you use your computer for, quad will assist if you do lots of video editing, should help as someone else said if you run many applications simultaneously, ( me, I can only manage one or two) games will eventually make full use of the quads, or if it's bragging rights then you prolly want quad. Otherwise I'd put my money to use elsewhere. In some respects it's like the people who buy the big off road vehicles to drive around town and never go off road. Buy what you need, and/or will use.
     
  11. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    i like my Quad core.
    newer games are being made to make use of multiple cores.
    most av's are being made to take advantage of mutiple cores etc.
    a intel quad core Q6600 costs around £136
    as pointed out the main limits of computers atm are the hard drive speed which cant always keep up with all the muti tasking.
    hopefully SSD drives come down in price soon so i can buy one for my system drive.
     
  12. Franklin

    Franklin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,517
    Location:
    West Aussie
    P4 HT emulating a dual core and an Intel core 2 duo.

    New PC down the track will be a quad along with either raptor drives and or 500 gig 32 meg cache sata?
     
  13. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    Anything more then 8-16MB cache just helps when writhing to the drive.
    the best atm is the 1TB drives from samsung with 320gb platters.
    fast and big capacity.
    the WD VelociRaptor 300gb is coming out soon.
    link
     
  14. Eagle Creek

    Eagle Creek Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Posts:
    734
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    If you can afford it: Quad.
    More is better, even although not all programs fully use it.

    I got a Q6600 by the way and I like it :).
     
  15. SystemJunkie

    SystemJunkie Resident Conspiracy Theorist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    Germany
    Dual Core, Dual Core who needs more? Actually sufficient.
    2 x 4 Ghz Top of the notch.
     
  16. InfinityAz

    InfinityAz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Posts:
    828
    Location:
    Arizona
    If the price difference isn't too large (or if you can afford it) go with Quad. My main desktop is currently a Q6600 and it's great (hardly ever max out all four cores).

    I was just setting up my sister's computer for her, a dual-core, and was amazed at how often I maxed out both cores.
     
  17. TairikuOkami

    TairikuOkami Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    2,509
    Location:
    Slovakia
    I bought Phenom 9600 BE, but I switched back and I bought 3x times cheaper, but faster Athlon X2 5000+ BE, which also takes less energy, so less heat is produced even whe overlocked. Gamers will not take advantage of Quad core just yet, based on the test I saw last week, but I can not find the link. :rolleyes:
     
  18. Franklin

    Franklin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,517
    Location:
    West Aussie
    This chart comparing high end CPU's is made using thousands of PerformanceTest benchmark results and is updated daily. These are the high end AMD and Intel CPU's are typically those found in newer computers.
    CPU Benchmark
     
  19. Meriadoc

    Meriadoc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Posts:
    2,642
    Location:
    Cymru
    Great when running my VMs but other times I'm not using the capacity and performance available, ah well suppose we'll have to wait. I needed yet another machine and was thinking at the time a high clock speed would be sufficient, still I built a quad :).
     
  20. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    Dual core already makes a difference regarding multi-tasking, I noticed this myself when I bought my new computer.
    So 4 core will do even better, but do you really need it ? is it worth the investment ? is another issue.
    Hardware is already OLD, when you pay for it. So what's the point ?
     
  21. SourMilk

    SourMilk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Posts:
    630
    Location:
    Hawaii
    I have a computer with C2D and one with QC2D. They both run at 2.4Ghz. The quad does things like encode/decode amazingly fast. The quad also gets very hot and power hungry. The dual does everything else like browsing, gaming, writing, etc. as fast or almost as fast as the quad without the heat or power issues. I guess it depends on what you need.
     
  22. mercurie

    mercurie A Friendly Creature

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    2,442
    Location:
    Sky over the Wilders Forest
    I think I know the answer but will ask just to be sure. Dual will run quieter then a quad?? Yes?? I like a quiet machine and my needs would be less then the power users for sure. More fan power to cool??
     
  23. Eagle Creek

    Eagle Creek Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Posts:
    734
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    No, usually not.
    On average, a quad core is running at lower speeds then a dual core is.

    I got a quad and it's steady at about 35* idle en 60* stressed. CPU fan running at aprox. 30% capacity.
     
  24. ASM

    ASM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Posts:
    164
    Intent to upgarde and this is what I want to know... Dual or Quad.

    I listen to mp3 while surfing or doing my work... sometime when playing with CAD or Graphic editor... my old AMD 3500 just getting slow and lag...

    Maybe a Dual is better...
     
  25. mercurie

    mercurie A Friendly Creature

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    2,442
    Location:
    Sky over the Wilders Forest
    Dual is more affordable and is all I needed given what I use my machine for based on my research. So I recently bought PC 1 in my sig. (Since my last post above).

    Thanks for the info. too, Eagle Creek. :thumb: