• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Dual Core Worth it?

E

eXx08

Banned
I'm seriously thinking about switching my thought about a Dual Cor X2 3800+ to a Opteron single core 146. My questions:

1.) Does dual-core have a very big performance gain
2.) Will it be easier to install and setup a single-core
3.) Is dual-core worth the extra $130


This is my first build and I want everything to go smooth.
 
Not if it causes another one of these threads to be created 😉.
 
Originally posted by: Markbnj
Not if it causes another one of these threads to be created 😉.
Click to expand...

I know there is like a million threads on this but I just need a down to the point answere.
 
Yeah, but the problem is, if I tell you "Damn straight it's worth it," which is my honest opinion, thirty five single core fanbois will come rampaging in to tell you how, in their expert opinion (meaning, the opinion that the average supermarket checkout person develops reading the cover headlines on PC World between customers) there are no multithreaded programs in windows and nobody multitasks.


 
Originally posted by: thekillerjks
I'm seriously thinking about switching my thought about a Dual Cor X2 3800+ to a Opteron single core 146. My questions:

1.) Does dual-core have a very big performance gain
2.) Will it be easier to install and setup a single-core
3.) Is dual-core worth the extra $130


This is my first build and I want everything to go smooth.
Click to expand...


1) If you are strictly talking about performance gain in applications, it is close to none in 95% of the home/office applications. You only benefit from dual-core if you run certain applications that uses 100% of your CPU, and you still need to use the computer at the same time.
2) No, they are the same thing unless you are going for an old motherboard in which you might need a single-core A64 in possesion to start-up your pc and update the BIOS.
3) It depends, read No.1
 
Originally posted by: toattett
Originally posted by: thekillerjks
I'm seriously thinking about switching my thought about a Dual Cor X2 3800+ to a Opteron single core 146. My questions:

1.) Does dual-core have a very big performance gain
2.) Will it be easier to install and setup a single-core
3.) Is dual-core worth the extra $130


This is my first build and I want everything to go smooth.
Click to expand...


1) If you are strictly talking about performance gain in applications, it is close to none in 95% of the home/office applications. You only benefit from dual-core if you run certain applications that uses 100% of your CPU, and you still need to use the computer at the same time.
2) No, they are the same thing unless you are going for an old motherboard in which you might need a single-core A64 in possesion to start-up your pc and update the BIOS.
3) It depends, read No.1
Click to expand...

 
I had a 3000+ before my dual core opteron (165), in regular scenario (i.e.: winamp+FF+NIS) it feels about the same speed, but if you are encoding, doing Photoshop, and in some heavy usage applications the computer feels a lot faster and more responsive, in games my results are pretty close (using the same speed) but if I start using another applications at the same time like team speak, winamp or some utility it feels a little faster, I say go for it if you can afford it.
 
a big benefit to using dual core processors is that the search function works on forums. single core processors cant use the search function.

CJ
 
LOL are you serious santa? Is that why it never works for me? Lol.

I would say go for the dual core. Of course I multitask all the time. But the longer you have your computer, the more you are going to find things you want to run into the background. I think dual-core is a very good investment considering this. I'm running soulseek, a bunch of torrents, music software (which resamples my music to 24bit/96khz), and like to have firefox up with 15+ tabs. Also theres gaim, konfabulator, ObjectDoc, Picasa in the background, Itunes, MS Antispyware, and Motherboard monitor 5. And thats just when I'm torrenting, listening to music, and browsing (pretty light useage). With that I "idle" at 30-45% on my Barton 3200+. But then say I want to burn a DVD for a friend, which converts avi to DVD-video, or playing a flash game (firefox doesn't like this), or watching a video or something else. I begin to notice some lag pretty easily. If you're like me, an upgrade to dual core would be VERY much worth the money. On the other hand, my current rig does everything I need to right now, its just a bit slow some times. An Athlon 64 might handle this perfectly (thanks to the HyperTransport), at least that is my guess. I don't know. Can anyone confirm/deny this?
I don't think its completely unthinkable to say even an Athlon 64 would be a bit taxed by all this. Thus, for future security, a dual core system would be like the $5,000,000 insurance plan. You get the multitasking performance now, plus the 64bit performance down the road, plus the REAL dual core useage/multitasking later. Sounds like a great upgrade.

I'll probably wait till quad core, however; I shouldn't really NEED an upgrade till then. Whats your current rig?
 
Originally posted by: santaliqueur
a big benefit to using dual core processors is that the search function works on forums. single core processors cant use the search function.

CJ
Click to expand...


🙂
 
ive had both, and i say go dual core. having norton on in the background has 0 affect on system speed after the upgrade to dual. you wont regret it if you can afford it.
 
Dual Core is worth it.. enough said..

I previously had a 3000+ cpu, and only had it for less than a year..
I now run a X2 3800+ cpu... the differences are amazing...

DVD Shrink, Vmware Workstation, Folding@Home and other various apps that I use, are a joy to use now since I have the system resources to handle it..

DVD Shrink, running under my previous 1.8Ghz, 3000+ cpu would just about be a full load on my system... Vmware workstation is also a beast on a single cpu system.....

Now I can run two single instances of a Vmware guest; set affinity for each seperate Vmware process, and go on my merry way.. with no hiccups at all..


 
For the average user, no..for someone who just wants high FPS in games, no. For someone who wants high FPS in games, and be able to decode a DVD in the background, YES.
 
This also depends on how long you plan on keeping your machine. Software is going the way of multithreaded, drivers and games are already being released that take advantage of dual-core.

In short, dual-core will have more longevity at this point.
 
Absolutely worth it if you are doing video editing and DVD rendering/authoring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top