is the dual core worth it?

[Alkali]

Originally posted by: Skyhanger

Originally posted by: biostud
Interesting read: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/28cpu-games.html

Although the conclusion is that the GPU will be the limiting factor once you crank of for details and resolution, and any modern CPU will do fine.

Looking at the graphs:
Battlefield 2: FX-57 >> 4800+ X2
DOOM III: FX-57 > 4800+ X2
Serious Sam 2: 4800+ X2 > FX-57
Quake IV: 4800+ X2 > FX-57
Call of Duty 2: FX-57 = 4800+ X2

Looking at the graphs, the newer games are starting to use multithreading. (Quake IV loads both cores at 100%) However, most of the older game engines don't utilize dual core yet... So it really depends on what you're running. I would say get a dual core if you don't plan to upgrade for 3 years and plan to play newer games...

I would just like to add that games like Guildwars utilize about 80% cpu power on BOTH CORES AT ONCE and improve frame rates significantly with multiple characters onscreen or in one town at once. There are tangible benefits in these games that were never intended to work with dual cores, but in fact some of them work very well....

I have no doubt that the nay-sayers of dual cores with games are going through the same reluctance we all felt with both BTX case standards (which still are very few and far between), SATA and PCIe (which in direct contrast took the market by storm). When there are tangible benefits, rather than just a format change for example, then the market actually moves quite fast.

Dont be suprised if games really start pulling out performance for dual cores very early next year because those games will be in their final stages now where the games companies will be looking into changing the program a little to use dual cores. And yes I know how complex games are, what Im talking about is simple offloading that can be done without much recoding.