NEWSFLASH: Quad core beats dual core

[Markfw]

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.

Yes, his install is like 5 or 6 years old, and he won't let it go. He says its fine, but it drives me crazy.

And my main system has a (sort of) 5 year old install, but its an I7 and screams. And I like firefox, I don't like chrome. Just because my opinions don't match yours doesn't mean I am an "elistest" (one of your previous posts), and just because I don't like chrome ?? I am relating my opinions based on fact. You want to use a single core ? go for it, but don't call me "elistist" since I and many other think the day of single core (or even dual) are numbered.

 

[Gillbot]

Yes, his install is like 5 or 6 years old, and he won't let it go. He says its fine, but it drives me crazy.

And my main system has a (sort of) 5 year old install, but its an I7 and screams. And I like firefox, I don't like chrome. Just because my opinions don't match yours doesn't mean I am an "elistest" (one of your previous posts), and just because I don't like chrome ?? I am relating my opinions based on fact. You want to use a single core ? go for it, but don't call me "elistist" since I and many other think the day of single core (or even dual) are numbered.

Mark, I agree with you. I really do, but I still maintain that it is NOT NECESSARY. A well tuned install of XP running basic apps is plenty fast for the basic user. Intel, AMD and most major manufacturers' marketing departments want everyone to believe they NEED faster machines with more and more cores when in reality it just is NOT needed for most mothers, grandmas and the basic internet.

You can't tell me that if computer progress just stopped right now, that all the software out there would cease to run? No, I'd bet any amount of money that they'd magically streamline their code and make their software run more efficiently on less powerful systems. But with all these marketing departments shoving GHz and cores down everyone's throats, why bother tweaking bloated code when people just keep buying?

 

[VirtualLarry]

granted, if I had a choice between:

A) single-core P4 PC with cable modem connection

and

B) dual-core X2 250 with a dial-up connection

I would pick A every time.

Of course, the best solution is a fast internet connection AND a fast machine.

(I actually do have "A" at a friend's house, it's surprisingly snappy for what it is. P4 2.4Ghz single-core, 2GB of DDR, Radeon 2600Pro AGP, and Win7 HP 32-bit. Hooked up to cable.)

 

[DominionSeraph]

And I like firefox, I don't like chrome.

And I like Windows Media Player 11 for my music. I wouldn't use it to bookend an argument about hardware speed sufficiency, though.
WMP11 being WMP11 does not mean I need a 980X to play mp3's, just as Firefox being Firefox doesn't mean I need a 980X to surf the 'net. Just as I could use Foobar or Winamp if WMP11's speed was an issue, one can use Opera, Chrome or IE8 to get a faster user experience than Firefox.

Just because my opinions don't match yours doesn't mean I am an "elistest" (one of your previous posts)

When your opinions don't match mine because they're elitist it does.

 

[cubeless]

quad cores are are the least of what make us bourgeoisie, you may have some cake with your, ahem, lesser cored processors...

thank god we live in a world where we can have cpu class warfare...

 

[mv2devnull]

Seeing all the heaps of debate (which point -- if any -- eludes me) I finally did check the link from OP.

Now my math fails. "20% faster than old core", it says. "84% faster thanks to more cores" it says. If I had a 20% faster core for single thread and perfect linear scaling for multi, my math would expect +140% from doubling cores. :hmm:

 

[Gillbot]

granted, if I had a choice between:

A) single-core P4 PC with cable modem connection

and

B) dual-core X2 250 with a dial-up connection

I would pick A every time.

Of course, the best solution is a fast internet connection AND a fast machine.

(I actually do have "A" at a friend's house, it's surprisingly snappy for what it is. P4 2.4Ghz single-core, 2GB of DDR, Radeon 2600Pro AGP, and Win7 HP 32-bit. Hooked up to cable.)

Of course YOU would, but I specifically stated the AVERAGE Grandma PC user has no need for quad + core or etc.

By that thought, we all MUST upgrade to 1TB hard drives or larger just because. Even though I can still readily fit an XP install on a 2GB partition usinf a CF drive and make an ultra-low power platform.

I hate it when people make blanket statements based off of their beliefs. Nobody NEEDS a dual, quad, whatever core. If PC's disappeared tomorrow, we all would survive, well maybe. ;-)

 

[DominionSeraph]

Of course YOU would, but I specifically stated the AVERAGE Grandma PC user has no need for quad + core or etc.

Errr... single-core P4 is not a quad core.

 

[grimpr]

Cheap dualcores at 3.0ghz+ with quality graphics like a passive ATI 5670 Ultimate from Sapphire and SSD drives from Intel/Sandforce are the best and most balanced systems someone can built/upgrade right now EXCEPT for gaming and parallel workloads and are a huge success for anything grandma or uncle PCs, key character is a silent running system that boots and runs fast and has the graphics grunt in a silent/passive form for offloading gpu work, from online HD videos to whole internet experience with the GPU accelerated version of IE9,Firefox 4, etc.

 

[Shmee]

you guys left out quake wars as one of those team based games better than CSS.

 

[bryanW1995]

There are some on this forum that think dual cores are all you need. I don't share that view (understatement)

No names need be mentioned...

I used to have a dual core...it sucked.

 

[exar333]

This actually makes a lot of sense. When you can get a quad core for $84, and the cheapest dual-core is $54, for $30, it just makes sense to get the quad.

What about if you are buying 5,000 PC? That extra $30 adds up quickly for someone only using a web-browser and MS Office (like many business users do).

 

[exar333]

Of course YOU would, but I specifically stated the AVERAGE Grandma PC user has no need for quad + core or etc.

By that thought, we all MUST upgrade to 1TB hard drives or larger just because. Even though I can still readily fit an XP install on a 2GB partition usinf a CF drive and make an ultra-low power platform.

I hate it when people make blanket statements based off of their beliefs. Nobody NEEDS a dual, quad, whatever core. If PC's disappeared tomorrow, we all would survive, well maybe. ;-)

This.

 

[VirtualLarry]

What about if you are buying 5,000 PC? That extra $30 adds up quickly for someone only using a web-browser and MS Office (like many business users do).

Even if the PCs with the quad-core could last an additional 2 years before being upgrade?

 

[Gillbot]

Errr... single-core P4 is not a quad core.

Oversight on my part, meh.

What about if you are buying 5,000 PC? That extra $30 adds up quickly for someone only using a web-browser and MS Office (like many business users do).

yep

Even if the PCs with the quad-core could last an additional 2 years before being upgrade?

really depends. Many machines are leased so that extra 2 years doesn't mean much. Also, there is no guarantee that ANY extra added on will add ANY life to a system. In all honesty, for my work I could get away with an old P4 northwood or similar, since that's all the requirements call for.

Unless your job is changing software frequently, there is typically no reason to upgrade at all.

 

[sandorski]

Fools! If you don't got a Hexacore, you've got something else!!