Dual core or quad?

[drajin]

Originally posted by: Gillbot

We can't make a clear recommendation to YOU because you didn't explain specifically what you need. If you run applications that can take full advantage of a quad core, then yes, get the quad. HOWEVER, if the majority of your time is spent in software that is not optimized for QUAD CORE processors, obviously getting a quad would be a waste of your money.

You see, this type of answer should've been at the beginning of this thread. Anyway, I think it's not just the software that matters for quads, it's multi tasking.

Originally posted by: Gillbot
After all of this, My point still stands. If you would review the replies in many of the current Quad/Dual threads, you will get an idea of what people are recommending and why they are making those recommendations. If you have software or specific applications in mind, those questions may have been already answered and it will give you a better idea of where your money will be best spent.

The thing is, I only be buying at early october, and no more upgrade or new rig whatsoever in 3-4 years. I am very time bounded. Other thread may have some recommendation, but those may be at different time, with different price and situation.

Originally posted by: Gillbot
Personally, with the new intel chips being very close to launch, I wouldn't buy anything. Wait a short time and you may just see price drops across the board with everyone anticipating the new hardware releases.

Ya, if I could, I'll delay my purchase, but it's not like I can do it. By that time, I'll be drooling for it, but hey, I'm prepared for that. I'll be purchasing this rig having that in mind. 🙂

 

[drajin]

myocardia & sskk, you can stop there. This is getting off topic. Like killbot says, "this whole dual/quad debate has been beaten to death. " My bet now is only on Q9550 & E8500. There is a good reason why I didn't list other CPU.

Anyway, after thinking thoroughly, and reading all comments for you all, my money is on E8500 right now. I re-think my purpose, and everything comes back to dual core. Main reasons is;

1) computer on 24/7
2) not much multi tasking
3) very rare software support multi core.

Though I'll be buying in 10 days time, after all the points you given me, I mind may have permenently set to E8500, unless someone can pull out some WISE and AWESOME reason to "poison" me in buying a Q9550. Haha 🙂

And again, Malaysia market is very unpredictable. Sometimes miracles DO HAPPEN here, where shoppers finishing stock, you get a damn cheap component. (which I don't expect that to happen) 😛

Anyway, Thx guys for spending your precious time helping me persuade to buy which CPU.

 

[Blackfirevatsal]

You'd be wrong, though. That $200 video card would need to be a $64 card here, since video cards are more than 3x as expensive in India.[/quote]

bro GPU is not that expensive you can easily get a 4870 at 17k (370$) & 4870X2 at 32K (696$)
i know they cost much more in india than there price in US & other countries but they are not thrice.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: sskk
Funny you say " Where you get up to a 25% performance gap between duals and quads is at the same price point, specifically between the E8400/E8500 & the Q6600/Q9300."
then shows a chart which the difference between E8400 and Q6600 is smaller than 10%. In that article, E8400 only beat Q6600 over 10% once, by 13%. They were on par once, and the rest has E8400 beat Q6600 by 5-8%.

Yeah, I linked to the wrong article.:laugh: I should have linked this one. Now, obviously, I'm not talking about the COD2 benchmarks, since that's obviously a GPU-bound game. But you'll notice that in Quake 4, an E6850 (which has less cache than an E8400, so should be 2-3% slower) is up to 19.xx% faster than a Q6600. So, I hereby revise my previous statement to "a dual-core can be up to 15-20% faster". Of course, the difference between an E8500 and a Q9550 should only be ~half that, since there's only ~half the speed differential.

Originally posted by: drajin
Anyway, after thinking thoroughly, and reading all comments for you all, my money is on E8500 right now. I re-think my purpose, and everything comes back to dual core.

Now,don't think that I'm saying that a dual-core will be enough for any game for the next 3-4 years, because it definitely won't. Games have already started to become quad-core optimized, and that isn't going to change, since both AMD and Intel are doing their best to stop making duals, and focus on making quad-cores and higher. Intel will be releasing a sex-core 😀 (6 core) CPU this year, and both AMD and Intel have plans on octo-core CPU's as soon as they possibly can get them to market.

Your particular problem is twofold: you have a limited amount of money, and it has to perform well for as long as possible. Since gaming computers need to be updated nearly continually, that poses a problem. But, ask any gamer around here what they update more often, and you'll find that video cards need to be replaced much more often than CPU's. With that in mind, I think you'll probably be happier with an E8500 + a 4870, than you would be with a Q9550 + a 4850 or other cheaper card. If you can afford both the video card you want + a Q9550, I would actually recommend the quad, because of the future.

Just realize that ~4 years from now, no matter what you buy today, it's going to be really struggling to play any new game, and may very well not be able to play it at all. Four years ago, I had a very fast system for that time, but I highly doubt it would even play any of the games released in the last six months. BTW, what resolution do you game at?

myocardia & sskk, you can stop there.

Now, now, these forums are for discussion. It's not rare at all for us to continue a discussion for quite some time after the OP (that's you, in this thread) has their answer. It's how we learn & share information with each other. No hard feelings, right sskk?

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal
bro GPU is not that expensive you can easily get a 4870 at 17k (370$) & 4870X2 at 32K (696$)
i know they cost much more in india than there price in US & other countries but they are not thrice.

Well, I've never even been to India. I have to go by what drajin says, and what I could dig up on the internet (which wasn't much, BTW). If the prices you list are accurate, that changes what he should do. He should buy a decent card for now, then replace it for a faster card later, just like we gamers do here, and in Europe, Australia, etc. I wonder if maybe drajin is only going by what he's heard, not what he's seen for himself, concerning computer parts pricing in India?😕

 

[dguy6789]

Might as well get a quad core now because in 6-12 months you will be wishing you did and buying one anyway. My point still stands from much earlier in the thread. It is the exact same as the slightly faster single core vs slightly slower dual core debate. The answer is the same now as it was then. A faster dual core is slightly faster(Read: Not noticeably faster) in current games than a slightly slower quad core. In 6-12 months, that same slightly slower quad core will be noticeably faster in games than the slightly faster dually.

 

[drajin]

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal

bro GPU is not that expensive you can easily get a 4870 at 17k (370$) & 4870X2 at 32K (696$)
i know they cost much more in india than there price in US & other countries but they are not thrice.

I'm 2 years in India already, and I got this one chance to return home, and decide to buy a pc. My studies end in 3-4 years from now (medicine). Price in India varies. Most of them are twice the price at most, but not thrice. You can buy P5Q Deluxe in Malaysia, but in India, with the same price, you can only buy P5Q Pro or just P5Q.

Originally posted by: myocardia

Your particular problem is twofold: you have a limited amount of money, and it has to perform well for as long as possible.

My problem is more to latter one. About money, it's not like I'm short of money. Everyone have a sense of "stingyness" in him. Lol

Originally posted by: myocardia

Just realize that ~4 years from now, no matter what you buy today, it's going to be really struggling to play any new game, and may very well not be able to play it at all. Four years ago, I had a very fast system for that time, but I highly doubt it would even play any of the games released in the last six months. BTW, what resolution do you game at?

It is only recently that high-end games starts to appear. It is also only recently that graphic technology progress so fast. But, gaming industry doesn't develop as fast as the GPU does. But I don't worry much about game. Usually, in games, GPU are more bottlenecking than CPU, and as my mobo can do crossfire, maybe I can do that in 1-2 years if I see my GPU is aging. Besides, if my hardware were to age towards the end of my studies (let say a year before I graduate) then it's fine. I probably spend more time preparing my finals and stops gaming. Then after return to my homeland, I buy a new rig, and renew it every 2 years like most of you people do.

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Might as well get a quad core now because in 6-12 months you will be wishing you did and buying one anyway. My point still stands from much earlier in the thread. It is the exact same as the slightly faster single core vs slightly slower dual core debate. The answer is the same now as it was then. A faster dual core is slightly faster(Read: Not noticeably faster) in current games than a slightly slower quad core. In 6-12 months, that same slightly slower quad core will be noticeably faster in games than the slightly faster dually.

I would really, REALLY hope this is TRUE. For this reason alone I will take Q9550. Now we got 2 people in this thread "poisoning" me. I wrote this before. If I took E8500, I would wonder why I didn't bought Q9550 that day, there goes my 3-4years. But, if I bought Q9550 now, I probably won't regret it, eventhough money goes. Though I'll drooling at the new hardware in 1-2 years time.

Hey, just when my mind was on E8500, it turns back in just minutes. :laugh:

 

[Idontcare]

How practical is it to think the OP is going to be in a position to update the software (OS, games, apps, etc) his computer will be running in the next 4 yrs if his specific circumstances are effectively precluding him of upgrading his hardware?

I'm just thinking that if prices for a quad-core upgrade are out of question during the 4yr period then its equally probable that purchasing the newest and greatest optimized for quadcore games in 2010 will be out of question as well.

If hardware upgrade has no future then software upgrade should have no future too. I don't see how you can avoid it...you either have cash and market access in which case you can do both (hardware and software) or you lack the cash or market access in which case you can do neither.

So OP, if you really are going to be living in a cave, so to speak, isolated from the rest of the computer world for 3-4 yrs then you are best off getting a dual-core system as the software you are going to run for the next 3-4yrs will be the software that is available today and the majority of that software does not take advantage of quad-core systems.

 

[Blackfirevatsal]

Originally posted by: drajin

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal

bro GPU is not that expensive you can easily get a 4870 at 17k (370$) & 4870X2 at 32K (696$)
i know they cost much more in india than there price in US & other countries but they are not thrice.

I'm 2 years in India already, and I got this one chance to return home, and decide to buy a pc. My studies end in 3-4 years from now (medicine). Price in India varies. Most of them are twice the price at most, but not thrice. You can buy P5Q Deluxe in Malaysia, but in India, with the same price, you can only buy P5Q Pro or just P5Q.

i don't know about what place in india are you are talking about but as far i know you can get 99% of product in india at most 50% more price than there retail price in U.S & i am staying india for last 20 years.

 

[dguy6789]

Going beyond practicality and stuff, quad cores are cooler!

 

[Gillbot]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
How practical is it to think the OP is going to be in a position to update the software (OS, games, apps, etc) his computer will be running in the next 4 yrs if his specific circumstances are effectively precluding him of upgrading his hardware?

I'm just thinking that if prices for a quad-core upgrade are out of question during the 4yr period then its equally probable that purchasing the newest and greatest optimized for quadcore games in 2010 will be out of question as well.

If hardware upgrade has no future then software upgrade should have no future too. I don't see how you can avoid it...you either have cash and market access in which case you can do both (hardware and software) or you lack the cash or market access in which case you can do neither.

So OP, if you really are going to be living in a cave, so to speak, isolated from the rest of the computer world for 3-4 yrs then you are best off getting a dual-core system as the software you are going to run for the next 3-4yrs will be the software that is available today and the majority of that software does not take advantage of quad-core systems.

This has been my thought all along, plus the fact that he is budget limited. Plus the fact that he has also stated he doesn't see the benefit of a quad core at this time. His money would be best either saved for later use or put toward other hardware such as a killer vid card.

EDIT: I just find it sad that everytime I open a Quad/Dual debate thread, you get inundated with QUAD QUAD QUAD recommendations and the most mentioned reason is "future proof", "in case" and etc. Most people have been suckered by Intel and AMD into thinking multi-core CPUs are the end all. When will people wake up and realize that multiple CPU computers have been out for a LONG time and unless you utilize those extra processors, they are useless. I guess this is nothing like back when people were running windows 98 on an old octo-Pentium Pro system eh? :roll:

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Gillbot
EDIT: I just find it sad that everytime I open a Quad/Dual debate thread, you get inundated with QUAD QUAD QUAD recommendations and the most mentioned reason is "future proof", "in case" and etc. Most people have been suckered by Intel and AMD into thinking multi-core CPUs are the end all.

Considering the old adage that a fool and his money are quick to part...if folks are willing to be wholly motivated to part with their money based simply on solicited but free advice from the interwebz then I suppose that completes the cycle of old adages with you get what you pay for.

 

[drajin]

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal

i don't know about what place in india are you are talking about but as far i know you can get 99% of product in india at most 50% more price than there retail price in U.S & i am staying india for last 20 years.

Staying in Bangalore. Malaysia's pc price is very cheap, as many things are manufactured in Malaysia. If you see all AMD and Intel chip, it says "Made in Malaysia" or just written as "Malay". But Malaysia only provides wafers, I think. Some are cheaper than the ones in US. So, don't compare India and US, but India and Malaysia. Price in India is definitely more than 50%, and also, ruppees is dropping, making it a lil bit more expensive.

Oh, you said 99%? I don't think so. For instance, speakers in Bangalore, you only have few choices, such as Altec Lansing, Creative, and Logitech. Where's edifier? Aego? Sonic Gear? Prodigy HD2 Sound Card? AudioTechnica products? ASUS Xonar? All these great products is absence as far as I know in Bangalore, and HP (Hewlett-Packard) dominates in India. And they call Bangalore the "Silicon Valley of India", and the piece of silicon I see here is probably sand. SP Road, supposedly a pc shopping centre, also selling crap. No offense to India, but I'm 2 years here and am frustrated not just IT deficient, but bad working ethics. India hates globalisation that much.

Coming back to topic;

Originally posted by: Idontcare

So OP, if you really are going to be living in a cave, so to speak, isolated from the rest of the computer world for 3-4 yrs then you are best off getting a dual-core system as the software you are going to run for the next 3-4yrs will be the software that is available today and the majority of that software does not take advantage of quad-core systems.

Eventhough I'll be isolated from hardware, doesn't mean I'm isolated from newer software. So, software is not a factor here. The fact that I don't upgrade is not that it's not available. It's just pc component is too expensive in India, especially vga card.

So, since myocardia made his post, there's no new real point stated to go whether Q9550 and E8550.

But, I think I almost come to a conclusion. Just one ultimate question. If money is NOT a factor, should I go for Q9550?

TQ

 

[Blackfirevatsal]

Originally posted by: drajin

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal

i don't know about what place in india are you are talking about but as far i know you can get 99% of product in india at most 50% more price than there retail price in U.S & i am staying india for last 20 years.

Staying in Bangalore. Malaysia's pc price is very cheap, as many things are manufactured in Malaysia. If you see all AMD and Intel chip, it says "Made in Malaysia" or just written as "Malay". But Malaysia only provides wafers, I think. Some are cheaper than the ones in US. So, don't compare India and US, but India and Malaysia. Price in India is definitely more than 50%, and also, ruppees is dropping, making it a lil bit more expensive.

Oh, you said 99%? I don't think so. For instance, speakers in Bangalore, you only have few choices, such as Altec Lansing, Creative, and Logitech. Where's edifier? Aego? Sonic Gear? Prodigy HD2 Sound Card? AudioTechnica products? ASUS Xonar? All these great products is absence as far as I know in Bangalore, and HP (Hewlett-Packard) dominates in India. And they call Bangalore the "Silicon Valley of India", and the piece of silicon I see here is probably sand. SP Road, supposedly a pc shopping centre, also selling crap. No offense to India, but I'm 2 years here and am frustrated not just IT deficient, but bad working ethics. India hates globalisation that much

Firstly i am not saying that india products has cheaper rates then Malaysia or US nor I am comparing prices i am just saying that. I know computer products are costly in india but they are not thrice or twice & Rupee is dropping, bro in this financial crisis all over the world every currency is dropping.

& about Speakers you can easily get Bose, JBL, sennheiser Etc in any metro city & i think you are talking abt prices not availability.

ASUS Xonar has launched in india

HP (Hewlett-Packard) dominates in India (what you meant to say by that)

Bad working ethics = i can't say much because i think it is hardware & tech related website not about work on ethics of different countries

& about products that r not available in india bro as far i know in business it is companies who come & open there network in countries not countries who say that pls open your branch in our country.


& at last nothing is perfect bro, everything has its pros & cons (like computer hardware) whether it is a commodity, person or a country, your country must also have problems. Nothing is perfect in this world bro. & Remember no country is bad bro whether it is Iraq, Iran, Britain, America, Pakistan or India, its people that are bad not countries & every country has that kind of people in small amount.

You can criticize Indians but not India has a whole nation.

bye

 

[Gillbot]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Gillbot
EDIT: I just find it sad that everytime I open a Quad/Dual debate thread, you get inundated with QUAD QUAD QUAD recommendations and the most mentioned reason is "future proof", "in case" and etc. Most people have been suckered by Intel and AMD into thinking multi-core CPUs are the end all.

Considering the old adage that a fool and his money are quick to part...if folks are willing to be wholly motivated to part with their money based simply on solicited but free advice from the interwebz then I suppose that completes the cycle of old adages with you get what you pay for.

:thumbsup:

I have fallen for this quick advice and been burned. I guess I should not care so much as to what others do with their $. 😉

 

[Gillbot]

Originally posted by: drajin
But, I think I almost come to a conclusion. Just one ultimate question. If money is NOT a factor, should I go for Q9550?

TQ

If money is not a factor, always buy the biggest and baddest you can.

 

[drajin]

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal

Firstly i am not saying that india products has cheaper rates then Malaysia or US nor I am comparing prices i am just saying that. I know computer products are costly in india but they are not thrice or twice & Rupee is dropping, bro in this financial crisis all over the world every currency is dropping.

First of all, sorry for insulting India. I was kinda frustrated when someone reminded me about India's IT. But, it is true that India's price is TWICE compared with Malaysia. Malaysia's hardware is cheaper than US retail price. When HD4870 1st launched, US retail price was $299, while Malaysia was like RM950 ($278). So, there's an explation why I said India's price was doubled. When I say ruppees is dropping, I meant that with comparison with Ringgit Malaysia.

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal
& about Speakers you can easily get Bose, JBL, sennheiser Etc in any metro city & i think you are talking abt prices not availability.

I didn't mention those as not available. They are also available in Malaysia. Besides, they are overpriced products, and doesn't performs as the price tag says. Those are not for general people, even audiophiles doesn't prefer them, not because of the price, but it's performance.

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal
HP (Hewlett-Packard) dominates in India (what you meant to say by that)

It means, there are less competition in India. HP wasn't such a big name in Malaysia. That makes companies competing, lowering prices and provide good service and longer warranty to attract customers.

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal
Bad working ethics = i can't say much because i think it is hardware & tech related website not about work on ethics of different countries

Whenever I bought things that comes in a box, the seal will always unsealed, such as MP3 player. For instance, I bought a Cowon 4GB player, and when see the box was obviously had been intruded, the 4GB was replaced with 2GB. This replacement was done by the suppliers, not the shopkeepers. This incident occurs a lot of time. Almost any products that comes in boxes.

Originally posted by: Blackfirevatsal
& about products that r not available in india bro as far i know in business it is companies who come & open there network in countries not countries who say that pls open your branch in our country.

This shows that companies is just not interested in India.

Oh, and you're right there's pros and cons in every country. I bought Cowon here because it's the only product that India has that Malaysia doesn't. But Malaysian can easily bought it in Singapore.

 

[drajin]

Originally posted by: Gillbot

If money is not a factor, always buy the biggest and baddest you can.

You mean the Q9550?

After all this lengthy discussion, my mind is 50-50. In october, I suppose to get a bonus, but then again it may be delayed to november. If it is not delayed, money is no longer a factor, so I go for Q9550, but if delayed, I take the E8500.

Thank you guys for your cooperation. I think this would be enough to guide me to buy what. In the end, it comes back to $$.

 

[dguy6789]

If anyone can afford a quad core at this point in time, there is no reason what so ever to get a dual core. It's really really simple. The Quad core is pretty much just as good in current games. It's better in everything else. In not too long, it will be better in the then current games too. It's a no brainer.

 

[Tempered81]

Well unless you want to get to > 4.3Ghz. Just about zero quads will do that.

 

[dguy6789]

In a game that uses all four cores effectively, a stock 2.4Ghz quad will outperform a dual at 4Ghz.

 

[Gillbot]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
In a game that uses all four cores effectively, a stock 2.4Ghz quad will outperform a dual at 4Ghz.

I HIGHLY disagree. Supreme Commander can utilize 4 cores and on my system, my frame rates were nearly identical with a 3GHz quad vs. a 3.6GHz dual. It depends heavily on the system OVERALL and less on one single component.

 

[dguy6789]

Sup Com doesn't really take too much advantage of quad core. It runs quite well on any decent dual core setup. Take a game like Quake 4 and compare single core to dual core performance. You'll see what I'm talking about. It will be the same in the future for quad vs dual. It really is simple. 2.4x4 > 4x2. Just a matter of the software using it or not.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: drajin
In october, I suppose to get a bonus, but then again it may be delayed to november. If it is not delayed, money is no longer a factor, so I go for Q9550, but if delayed, I take the E8500.

There's your answer, and I believe it's a smart one.😉

Originally posted by: dguy6789
In a game that uses all four cores effectively, a stock 2.4Ghz quad will outperform a dual at 4Ghz.

With gaming (which is different from things like rendering or video encoding), the two would most likely be closer to equal. Then again, this was a comparison of a 2.83 Ghz quad and a 3.13 Ghz dual, so yeah, in your scenario, the quad would utterly destroy the dual-- probably by a 3:1 margin.<<-- That's assuming your video card can keep up, obviously.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Gillbot
Most people have been suckered by Intel and AMD into thinking multi-core CPUs are the end all. When will people wake up and realize that multiple CPU computers have been out for a LONG time and unless you utilize those extra processors, they are useless. :roll:

That's why you have the fastest single core you can find in your gaming computer, right? Oh wait, a single core would be as useless today for gaming as a dual will be in not very long. BTW, I was the leader of the "dual-cores are useless for gaming" pack, right up until the day that Oblivion was released, and guess what the one thing every single (okay, almost) reviewer said about Oblivion? Right, they said it's virtually unplayable without a dual-core, no matter the video card. And how many AAA games released after Oblivion were single threaded? Right, not too many.

The same has started happening with quads. We aren't there quite yet, we're still in the beginning phase of the transition, but be ready. Since it has already started, it won't be that long, especially with both AMD & Intel pushing for SMP in every app. Were you aware that Intel actually has a team of coders that they "loan" to game studios (is that the right word?), to teach them how to code SMP?