dual core for my gaming rig ?

[lotus503]

I have a 4400 and I love it, I usaully run dual display so playing a game and checking auctions, email etc, at the same time is a bit faster with a dual core

 

[darkdemyze]

It's pointless to get a 4200 IMO. Get a 3800 and OC it. Or even better a opty 165 and OC.

 

[NaOH]

I agree. Why spend a buttload of extra money for a 4200 if you can easily OC (takes less than a min) to or past those speeds. Unless you are not willing to OC......

Also, why buy one core when you can have two cores running at speeds you would get if you purchased only one. Even though games are usually GPU bottlenecked, you could use the extra processing power to have antivirus etc open while gaming. You can also alt tab out and do a bunch of other crap while you game. Also, since a lot more programmers are jumping on the SMP bandwagon, it would be best to future proof yourself. Why skimp out and take the risk with your investment?


Idk if you do a lot of this but dual core FTW with video editing, picture editing, CAD, encoding (music and dvd).

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: AMDUALY
I agree. Why spend a buttload of extra money for a 4200......Why skimp out and take the risk with your investment?

Ok, here's the thing. A "buttload" more money from a 3800+ to a 4200+ is only about $60 (3800+ 4200+). However, the difference in price of a single-core 3000+ to the cheapest dual-core is $170 (3000+).

Some buyers like to spend money on the parts that give them the best bang-for-buck performance in the applications they use. For gaming, it isn't the dual-core right now. I realize developers are just beginning to utilize dual-core technology in games, but buying one now to "future proof" isn't the best idea, IMO. By the time the 2nd core actually makes a difference in gaming, that buyer could've saved another $100 on the chip, or have bought a much faster dual-core chip for the same price.

Why buy something now that you won't use for several more months? (Again, assuming only gaming applications right now because that is what the OP mentioned.) If encoding performance is needed, then that's a different story. But, being able to alt-tab easier, or run a virus scan at the same time as playing Doom3, are not what I would consider solid reasons to spend an extra $170 right now.

 

[ronnystrauss]

yeah i was thinking get the opteron 165. or 170 even. they are by far the best choice. and if you dont wanna overclock get the x2 3800

 

[Ludootje]

heh that HAS to be confusing for the OP
IMHO, the choice is pretty easy: do you upgrade frequently (i.e. +/- every year)? If so, go single core now, and get a dual core in your next upgrade, because in a year or so, most games will support SMP.
If you don't upgrade frequently (more like 2.5 or 3 years), get a dual core because, like everyone else is saying, they're future proof.
So it's up to you to decide wether you need to be future proof or not.