A few questions about Quad Core CPUs.

[ibex333]

1)How soon will we see quad cores that cost no more than $300 and offer signifficantly higher performance than dual cores?

2)Will they completely overshadow the dual cores with their arrival making dual core users want to upgrade?

3)With good Xmas sales on PSUs and RAM, I decided that I might be able to afford to build a system around a e6400. However, I dont want to throw out $700 or more just to be forced to upgrade 6 months from now.
Basically, what I need is, for this system to last me for the next 2-3 years, and offer solid performance in games and apps for this WHOLE time period.

NOTE: I'm talking only about the CPU, and NOT the video card. I know that has to be upgraded often to keep up with the games.

 

[Markfw]

They are available now, but you can;t make use of them (most people anyways). Just get a Conroe... 6300,6400,6600

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: ibex333
1)How soon will we see quad cores that cost no more than $300 and offer signifficantly higher performance than dual cores?

2)Will they completely overshadow the dual cores with their arrival making dual core users want to upgrade?

3)With good Xmas sales on PSUs and RAM, I decided that I might be able to afford to build a system around a e6400. However, I dont want to throw out $700 or more just to be forced to upgrade 6 months from now.
Basically, what I need is, for this system to last me for the next 2-3 years, and offer solid performance in games and apps for this WHOLE time period.

NOTE: I'm talking only about the CPU, and NOT the video card. I know that has to be upgraded often to keep up with the games.

The Quad Core being released in the future which would match the level of the processor your going to buy in Single Threaded performance, isn't arriving till Mid 2007, and even at that point will still be almost 2x as costly as the Dual Core version. So the Quad Core transition will take some time, so you don't have to worry about being obsoleted that quick. But you will be obsoleted eventually, it is bound to happen, but you should be allright for the bulk of next year at least.

 

[Duvie]

Even by 3rd quarter of next year the Q6400 which as mentioned above would not be the fastest at single threaded apps is still going to be 450 range....I wouldn't expect to see a quad core chip below 300 for all of 2007...that is my opinion though....


I have not found a single app capable of using all 4 cores...seem to be IO limited in some apps....The best I can do is run multiple apps to hold 100% of all 4 cores...

 

[Tyhr]

Originally posted by: DuvieI have not found a single app capable of using all 4 cores...seem to be IO limited in some apps....The best I can do is run multiple apps to hold 100% of all 4 cores...

Some compositing software takes full advantage of multiple cores. Dual and even "quad" Xeons have been around for quite a while. (With multiple CPU's on a single motherboard, we're now looking at 8-16 cores when populating with quads in the studio).

Anyways, I know I'd take full advantage of multiple cores. The software was written for it - written for more cores than is physically available today. But for MOST software, this is not true.

 

[harpoon84]

A mainstream >$300 quad core will not come out for at least another 6 - 9 months. I honestly doubt applications in 2 - 3 years time will *require* QC. Sure, massively threaded applications may benefit, but that doesn't mean a dual core would be obsolete either. I think that dual core will remain the 'baseline' standard for many years to come.

My suggestion - get a cheap C2D now, and overclock it to 3GHz+. It will provide bleeding edge performance for current applications, and is 'future proof' enough to last you for a few years. If and when you need a quad core, you can always upgrade to one in the future when prices are lower.

 

[Hajpoj]

Well talking about games, a dual core OCed to 3GHZ will last you 3-5 years before the cpu bottlenecks game performance imo.

 

[ibex333]

Well, really that is all I need... My only plans are to play games, learn Python, mabe C++, and a little Photoshop.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Hajpoj
Well talking about games, a dual core OCed to 3GHZ will last you 3-5 years before the cpu bottlenecks game performance imo.

actually i have a QX6700 sitting on top of my desk right now. Im getting a Asus Striker board sometime tommarrow from new egg.

I got the QX6700 as a trade for a PS3 + 250 dollars cash. So my price on the cpu was 699 <- got it at costco.com - 250 = 450 dollars paid for a quad core.

As of right now im not happy with the reviews because i dont think nvidia has optimised there chipset for quad core. It makes no sense when the dual core xtreme version clocked at the same speed can perform better then my quad core.

Anyhow im gonna completely watercool this beast and see how far i can push it. But as of right now, if your obsenely rich like the red sox owner who dished out 50g's for his ps3, id stay away from quad core til they work out some issues.

Of course if u can pick one up for 450 like i did, ud be a fool not to pass that up either.

 

[Hajpoj]

more like you made about $550

 

[aigomorla]

actually the QX6700 costs around 1200 right now if u do a good search. add 250 to the final price its around 1450 total i made off that PS3. Subtract the original fee's of 743 shipping and tax, i made around 700 off that PS3. I got lucky not to mention i camped in front of my computer from 5am - 4pm to get that PS3. Also i came very fortunate to find someone willing to trade a brand new sealed quad core + 250 in cash for it on craig list forums. Otherwise id probably have made 1100 like everyon else did on the inital distribution date.

But yeah... id stay away from quad cores right now as i have mentioned, there performance isnt worked out yet. But i will also say, once i get my striker and i pop it in, and start tweeking the settings, i'll be sure to share the data. But i got very very lucky in my X2 and i think my luck on the quad core wont be so good.