Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,260
- 16,117
- 136
Some games yes, but try to name more than half a dozen games where the difference between a new OCed dual and OCed quad is noticeable (i.e. no "here you get 100 instead of 80fps") and I think you'll find that extremely hard.
If you play mainly one of those few games where it really matters, that's another story - but then there are games where a higher clocked dual core will also be a better buy than the quad (hi SC)
So you're actually claiming that a modern dual-core isn't even good enough for web browsing and reading your mail? Honestly? Yeah that explains why 99% of all people (if you include the whole business side that's probably more) aren't using the web because their machines just don't have the right specsVirtualLarry said:
And for the gaming part, see above.
yeah I do believe Intel's marketing and pricing is very confusing for the average buyer in fact just other day a coworker of mine asked about buying a i3 thinking it's like a quad. I think i3 might beat out an AMD quad in some situations but definitely cannot compete with i5 750 in most of the apps. It is true this is buyer's problem but I think Intel are not making the distinction clear, and I also believe they are hoping people like my coworker who would get the i3/HT vs a full fledged quad core which is cheaper to make.
Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,260
- 16,117
- 136
Some games yes, but try to name more than half a dozen games where the difference between a new OCed dual and OCed quad is noticeable (i.e. no "here you get 100 instead of 80fps") and I think you'll find that extremely hard.
If you play mainly one of those few games where it really matters, that's another story - but then there are games where a higher clocked dual core will also be a better buy than the quad (hi SC)
So you're actually claiming that a modern dual-core isn't even good enough for web browsing and reading your mail? Honestly? Yeah that explains why 99% of all people (if you include the whole business side that's probably more) aren't using the web because their machines just don't have the right specs
And for the gaming part, see above.
OK, this took me 30 seconds to find a game where 30 vs 45 fps is the difference between a dual (530) and a quad (760).
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/129
I don't have all day to find and link every game, but that was my point, some games, OK, but not all by a big margin.
Last edited:
Gillbot
Lifer
- Jan 11, 2001
- 28,830
- 17
- 81
That REALLY depends on the user. My mother doesn't need more than a single core celeron or sempron since Freecell and Facebook aren't CPU intensive. Why spend the money on a dual, quad or hex core when it wouldn't be utilized.
Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,260
- 16,117
- 136
I gave my dad a Athlon64 3200+, and its an absolute pig just loading, or running anything. It has 2 gig of memory with only using 240 meg and runs Win XP 32, and had 90 of the 110 gig HD free ! Trying to run Firefox requires quite a bit of patience.
I recently got a new PC at work after complaing, was some old P4 pc...The new one which they proudly presented? An core2Duo e8400, eg. like over 2 year old tech and an ultra cheap scorpio blue hd. (from HP...) ok, it's much better than before but I did expect at least the newest dual core (=clarkdale) but then I would probably even take the slowest dual core and an ssd over a quad for work.
Gillbot
Lifer
- Jan 11, 2001
- 28,830
- 17
- 81
My mom was using my Atom rig with 4GB ram and XP and she never had an issue for a while but I upgraded her anyway. Now it's a single core sempron with 4gb ram and still no hiccups.
EDIT: What I mean is, more cores is NOT always the solution.
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
lets see
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3833/intels-core-i7-970-reviewed-slightly-more-affordable-6core/5
even a Core 2 Duo 6850 produce enough fps in Left 4 Dead
A High frequency i5 Dual Core is as fast as i7 Quad core (HT) in Crysis
Unreal engine 3 is ok with a dual core
Dragon Age gets more with a quad core but, a dual core i5 gets enough fps
same for Dawn Of War
A dual core i5 is faster that a quad core + HT i7 920 in WoW
There will be games that need a quad core CPU, but even for those games a high frequency Dual Core could be fine.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3833/intels-core-i7-970-reviewed-slightly-more-affordable-6core/5
even a Core 2 Duo 6850 produce enough fps in Left 4 Dead
A High frequency i5 Dual Core is as fast as i7 Quad core (HT) in Crysis
Unreal engine 3 is ok with a dual core
Dragon Age gets more with a quad core but, a dual core i5 gets enough fps
same for Dawn Of War
A dual core i5 is faster that a quad core + HT i7 920 in WoW
There will be games that need a quad core CPU, but even for those games a high frequency Dual Core could be fine.
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
Great example! Especially considering that SC2 uses only exactly two threads, but profits quite a bit from more cache, mem bandwidth and Co - just not more threads/cores:
http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page13.html
Really helpful from you. And even if you used one game where quads do bring a noticeable advantage, that's nothing I debated in the first place - there are a few games here and there, but for the great majority a dual is still good enough. But if 3-4games (that's the amount I can think of right now, I'm sure you can find 6 or so) are "a big margin" for you, while we can throw dozens over dozens of games where it doesn't matter at you - well we can always disagree
Last edited:
VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
Facebook? Not CPU-intensive? C'mon. I guess you forgot about all of those Flash games on Facebook? Facebook is practically a Flash games portal, with a little web-based chat thrown in. No way will a single-core handle that.
VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
I can't believe you upgraded your mom's machine, and still stuck her with a single-core. Is she running an anti-virus program? She at least needs a dual-core, straight off.
My mom has been on a single-core Celeron 440 (2.0Ghz C2D single-core) for several years, and it ran ok for her, on XP, but I've purchased an AMD micro-ATX board for her and a quad-core. I just need the time and access to her machine to upgrade her.
For another thing, any type of serious web video (full-screen 1080P YouTube, full-screen Hulu) requires at least an overclocked dual-core, or a quad-core, for smooth full-screen video. That is, if you don't have the newest AMD chipset onboard.
No idea, but I can say that my old OCed e8400 got way better numbers than the numbers posted in your review, sure as hell no noticeable minimums in the low 20s. So probably the "truth" is somewhere in between - but DA is one game that profits a bit from a quad, although in my personal experience I'm completely fine with minimums around 35 and averages in the 50s in this sort of game.
Uh yeah, since flash is so well multi threaded, the difference between a hexcore and a dual core is.. more or less not existing. A single core is too meager, but except one sole user the "most of the time no quad core needed" fraction is saying exactly that: A Dual core is good enough.VirtualLarry said:
And since I'm currently at home where my old e8400 stands (no OC any longer) - no a 1080p youtube video sure as hell doesn't need a OCed dual core or even a quad - while playing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ5U8suTUw0 fullscreen, 1080p without GPU acceleration (well unrealistic) not one core got over 60% utilization
Last edited:
IntelUser2000
Elite Member
- Oct 14, 2003
- 8,686
- 3,787
- 136
You know better than to cross compare between two sites. Different drivers, different game versions, different operating systems.
Not to mention Anandtech reviews generally keep the CPU factory defaults(ie. Hyperthreading and Turbo Mode on), while PCGameshardware disables some of them. The PCGH site is also using 4xMSAA and 16xAF while Anandtech has both disabled.
Voo said:
False. Starcraft 2 might not seem made for more than 2 threads but more cores do benefit the game.
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/starcraft_ii_wings_of_liberty_beta_performance,7.html
Last edited:
VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
I'm pretty sure that disabling cores also disables parts of the l3 cache, doesn't it? Because I've played hours with my 750 and never seen much activity on more than two threads and even that review and others don't show much activity.
Hmm can't test it here with HW acceleration, but I remeber seeing quite a large drop on my main rig with a 4870 on other videos - can't the 4250 accelerate flash as good as some of the bigger cards? But seeing that a low clocked mobile dual core is still perfectly fine with that task and I generally assumed we were talking about new desktop dual cores, I don't think that's too shaby.
Last edited:
Gillbot
Lifer
- Jan 11, 2001
- 28,830
- 17
- 81
She doesn't have the budget nor need for dual or more. It works FINE and she's ok with it. End of story. For those that NEED the extra cores, fine, but for many that is NOT the case. A simple "add more cores" regardless of cost is exactly what CPU makers want you to believe.
jacktesterson
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 5,493
- 3
- 81
Dual cores are still awesome machines.
I put them in family or general pc use all the time.
I upgraded my dad from athlon x2 to a x4 recently as I had some spare CPUs and he never even noticed as all he does is browse and use office.
My htpc is a dual core chip by heart
I put them in family or general pc use all the time.
I upgraded my dad from athlon x2 to a x4 recently as I had some spare CPUs and he never even noticed as all he does is browse and use office.
My htpc is a dual core chip by heart
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
And which of these would be unplayable on a 4.2GHz i3 and GTX 580?
Yup.
Indeed, those can make use of additional cores. And for distributed computing-type tasks a quadrillion cores would be good. But this doesn't mean that I need 999,999,999,999,999 more X2 5200+s to have a perfectly workable computer. Or that I need more than a Northwood Celeron to be doing what I'm doing right now. Markfw900's insinuation that one does was elitist horse crap.
You linked the wrong post.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2129824
Reread that OP's post.
OP's 4 month old build sketch had:
No budget listed.
Now why would you need me to come up with a generic 980X/GTX 580 build? You are perfectly capable of that.
OP was throwing around big ticket items lightly so I decided to have fun and go bigger. 32 cores for only around $2000 more than the originally specced hex-core was... interesting.
Davidh373
Platinum Member
- Jun 20, 2009
- 2,428
- 0
- 71
I actually advised he get some more memory and a Quadro. I actually recommended against the 580 and 980X to go with something a bit more substantial for his needs, and not gaming... You of course did the same, but what is "fun" isn't always what is best. He didn't need 32 cores, but he did need an amazing G-Card to back up his need to model something to render. Now what you built would be an AMAZING dedicated render box with some other hardware added in, but a workstation it does not make.
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
It does not speak well of you that you cannot get such a rig working well.
Also, using Firefox and then complaining about speed is just... wow.
My brother-in-law's Athlon 64 3000+/2GB with a DominionSeraph- tuned fresh install of XP SP3/MSSE/Chrome on his brand-new Spinpoint F3 is pretty damned tight. It had had an old and cluttered install of XP on an ancient 40GB hard drive, and even then it wasn't half bad.
Chrome on this XP Celeron 2.4GHz/512MB/Maxtor DiamondMax 21 ain't bad, either.
Outer track: 65MB/s, average 58MB/s in 7200RPM makes this storage subsystem subsystem substantially faster than the venerable WD BB's and JB's.
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
Yours was a linear progression from the original outline; mine was a decent ways outside the box; and we weren't to the point of finalizing -- OP's usage patterns weren't even defined.
I didn't seriously think it would align to final, but that's no reason not to throw it out there so it can be tested against other builds.
Hill climbing from a narrow base gets you the problem of getting stuck at local maximums.
Last edited:
the story now is, a new quad core Sandybridge of the lower range like a core i5-2300,
is more powerful in single threads than earlier corei5-6xx due to the i5-2300 increased IPC and its IMC. it is embarrassingly more powerful than the i5-6xx in highly threaded applications.
dual core SB is a very nice improvement over dual core clarkdale (for the same price)
quad core SB is a nice improvement over quad core Lynnfield (for the same price)
quad core SB is a BIG improvement over dual core clarkdale (for the same price)
what we don't see yet are high clock speed, dual core i?-2200k (which would probably be a quite sweet processor itself)
is more powerful in single threads than earlier corei5-6xx due to the i5-2300 increased IPC and its IMC. it is embarrassingly more powerful than the i5-6xx in highly threaded applications.
dual core SB is a very nice improvement over dual core clarkdale (for the same price)
quad core SB is a nice improvement over quad core Lynnfield (for the same price)
quad core SB is a BIG improvement over dual core clarkdale (for the same price)
what we don't see yet are high clock speed, dual core i?-2200k (which would probably be a quite sweet processor itself)
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 407
-
Facebook
Twitter