Quad significantly better than Duo for gaming?

[chess9]

Originally posted by: krnmastersgt

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: krnmastersgt
The Q9450 is a pretty good chip, although like prior posts have said, the majority of games will not see any benefit. What kinds of games does your daughter play?

If it's an FPS game or something similar, a higher clocked dual core would be faster than a quad, I think UT3 is the only game that sees better performance with a quad but this is talking about framerates higher than LCD monitors can output anyways, so no real matter.

If it's an RTS game, the newer the game the more CPU heavy it is, SupComm is probably the best example of a quad beating down a dual core once you get into heavy scenarios.

Unreal Tourney is her favorite game. She likes the graphics in Crysis but says it's a bit boring. She plays some of the others as well, including Chessmaster. I'm sure she needs Chessmaster at about 3200 rating points to really get a workout. LOL!

But, what about future games? Aren't they all going to be quad oriented? Even if we have a depression?

-Robert

Many games are going multi-threaded, however I must say most FPS games that aren't incredibly cpu heavy for intense physics like Crysis probably won't need more than a dual core until we're past Nehalem family cpu's. They'll be quad optimized, but won't really need it.

However if more games follow Crysis or are RTS like SupComm where there's a lot of AI and other things running in the background or lots of physics that isn't/can't be offloaded to the gpu, then you'll start to see quads pull away from duals again.

As it stands, I think your daughter would be fine with an E8400, maybe an E7200 even, and you can upgrade to a quad cheaper next year if her system is falling short in the games she plays.

Yes, good thinking. I am leaning towards the 8500, however. It's slightly faster and is still a good overclocker, eh?

-Robert

 

[ultra laser]

If you own a quad core, then quad cores are better.
If you own a dual core, then dual cores are better.
Whichever one you buy will be better, as
it's all e-peen bickering.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Right now, quads do not benefit gaming specifically very much. In the future, they will. The reason to go with a quad over a dual is for sheer productivity and general enjoyability of using the computer. For example, I don't have to shut down every little thing I am doing on my machine to play crysis or ut3 with acceptable performance, unlike dually users. I just open up a game and play it when I feel like I need a break from work or whatever.

oh crap you know what i totally didnt think about that.

Yes crysis uses 2 cores, but if you have a TON of crap in the background, you can in a sense be using 3 cores.

So possibly, depending on how well your OS can balance load, a Quadcore can actually be better.

+1 yes your correct, thanks for reminding me this.

 

[Gillbot]

Search, this has been debated and beaten to DEATH.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Gillbot
Search, this has been debated and beaten to DEATH.

Yes, but the last thread on point ended in February. It probably seems like a dead horse to you because it's been outta' the barn so long. Anyway, 9 months is a lifetime in computers.


-Robert

 

[Drsignguy]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Gillbot
Search, this has been debated and beaten to DEATH.

Yes, but the last thread on point ended in February. It probably seems like a dead horse to you because it's been outta' the barn so long. Anyway, 9 months is a lifetime in computers.


-Robert

I beg to differ, as Gillbot has said, It has! Something like an easy once a week thing!

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Drsignguy

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Gillbot
Search, this has been debated and beaten to DEATH.

Yes, but the last thread on point ended in February. It probably seems like a dead horse to you because it's been outta' the barn so long. Anyway, 9 months is a lifetime in computers.


-Robert

I beg to differ, as Gillbot has said, It has! Something like an easy once a week thing!

Whatever....

-Robert

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: chess9
Yes, but the last thread on point ended in February.

-Robert

like posted above, every week there is a thread like this

-Robert

 

[faxon]

also, since you were looking at the Q9450 originally, what site were you buying from? newegg has the q9450 and the q9550 listed for the same exact price ($319), and the 9450 is out of stock right now LOL. personally i would just buy a quad, but then again i do a lot of other stuff with my comp which, even if the apps arent quad threaded, could benefit from having a quad, since you can just run more of the same types of apps to use up the cores (ripping/transcoding software for DVDS/CDS being ripped to FLAC ect ect), plus when gaming at home, i like to have various apps running in the backround, since i have 2 monitors, and i want to be able to game with windows media player open, ventrilo, various game related apps (like in eq2 i used to play with a combat parser before i quit playing eq2), ect ect. it really depends on the person. what i would do is find out what kind of stuff your daughter does while playing UT3 (her favorate game) and then go from there. and just for the record, UE3 (unreal engine 3), while it is quad threaded, doesnt need a quad core to hit its max performance point. i can play UT3 at more than playable framerates on my HD2900PRO 1GB with an A64 4000+ single core CPU and 2x1gb of 2-3-2-5 timing DDR400 at 1600x1200.

 

[chess9]

Faxon:

She uses a laptop now, as her desktop is very old and has been stuck in the closet. I would think she'd be more likely to be a serious multi-tasker again on a fast desktop. She is often on IM, emailing, browsing the net, and studying (supposedly) at the same time. I suspect she would do fine with the e8500, running at 3.4 or more. With the new processors coming out, the quads are going to seem dated very quickly, wouldn't you think? In this economy though, I don't see how there is going to be much of a market for upgrading computers. One of my friends and her 200 fellow employees all got laid off from their jobs in Orlando. Not good, and that's the tip of the iceberg, eh?

-Robert

 

[v8envy]

Q9400 is $199 at Fry's right now. Just get it, don't debate it any further.

 

[Absolution75]

The answer: Unless you play Crysis/UT3 a lot, a quadcore isn't faster than a dualcore in games.

Easiest way to compare processors in games is just by their clock speed.


/beats dead horse more.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Absolution75
The answer: Unless you play Crysis/UT3 a lot, a quadcore isn't faster than a dualcore in games.

That should be "Crysis, Crysis: Warhead, UT3, M$'s FSX, or Supreme Commander with maximum bots on large maps".

/beats dead horse more.

Kicks dead horse, to make sure it's actually dead.

 

[dguy6789]

Duals will be outdated faaaaaarrrrrr before quads will be.......

http://www.firingsquad.com/har..._performance/page3.asp

This will be the difference between duals and quads in games once games use four cores. As long as the video card isn't a bottleneck, look at the differences. It really is totally mind boggling that people suggest duals over quads. I wonder if most of you guys would suggest a single 5Ghz processor over a 3Ghz dual.... In a game that uses four cores properly, your 4Ghz OCed duallies will be outperformed by a Q6600 at stock....

 

[Kraeoss]

well if quad's are the future tech then get a cheap dual core now and when 1156 releases u get your quad... simple

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
your 4Ghz OCed duallies will be outperformed by a Q6600 at stock....

I'll buy a quad when that's happening.

 

[Gillbot]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Absolution75
The answer: Unless you play Crysis/UT3 a lot, a quadcore isn't faster than a dualcore in games.

That should be "Crysis, Crysis: Warhead, UT3, M$'s FSX, or Supreme Commander with maximum bots on large maps".

/beats dead horse more.

Kicks dead horse, to make sure it's actually dead.

I beg to differ. I did my own comparisons in Supcom and i get better framerates with a higher clocked dual core over the quad. I ran my quad at 3.7GHz and my dual at 4.5GHz and the dual whooped it.

 

[bludragon]

Just looking at the current prices on newegg:

e8400 = 165
q6600 = 180 + cooler (as it's oem)
e8500 = 190
q9300 = 260

and this:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...uad-q9300_9.html#sect0

I'm still happy with my choice of e8400

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: bludragon
Just looking at the current prices on newegg:

e8400 = 165
q6600 = 180 + cooler (as it's oem)
e8500 = 190
q9300 = 260

and this:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...uad-q9300_9.html#sect0

I'm still happy with my choice of e8400

Interesting....An 8600 on water cooling might be the way to go, eh? Some guys are getting over 4.5.

Thanks for the post.

-Robert

 

[Tempered81]

well they're also getting over 4.5 with E0 E8400's and E8500's. If you know where to find an E0 stepping of a less costly chip, you can still get the same speeds temps & volts, you just won't get the 10x multiplier.

E8400 $159
E8500 $189
E8600 $269

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Gillbot
I beg to differ. I did my own comparisons in Supcom and i get better framerates with a higher clocked dual core over the quad. I ran my quad at 3.7GHz and my dual at 4.5GHz and the dual whooped it.

Were you using the maximum allowed amount of bots? Because, according to the people who own it, the more bots you're using, the slower every dual-core becomes. BTW, OP, I'm definitely not recommending you get a quad. For the type of multitaking you've described, any decent dual-core could handle with one core tied behind it's back.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Gillbot

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Absolution75
The answer: Unless you play Crysis/UT3 a lot, a quadcore isn't faster than a dualcore in games.

That should be "Crysis, Crysis: Warhead, UT3, M$'s FSX, or Supreme Commander with maximum bots on large maps".

/beats dead horse more.

Kicks dead horse, to make sure it's actually dead.

I beg to differ. I did my own comparisons in Supcom and i get better framerates with a higher clocked dual core over the quad. I ran my quad at 3.7GHz and my dual at 4.5GHz and the dual whooped it.

emm..

Tell the boys what hard drive you had on that system Gill. :T

*running away really fast now b4 he smacks me off my high horse*

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Gillbot
I beg to differ. I did my own comparisons in Supcom and i get better framerates with a higher clocked dual core over the quad. I ran my quad at 3.7GHz and my dual at 4.5GHz and the dual whooped it.

Were you using the maximum allowed amount of bots? Because, according to the people who own it, the more bots you're using, the slower every dual-core becomes. BTW, OP, I'm definitely not recommending you get a quad. For the type of multitaking you've described, any decent dual-core could handle with one core tied behind it's back.

Myo he doesnt even have anything close to the newer gen drive. I think he's running a 80GIG OG Maxtor. :rofl:

He has a WD640 he's hiding somehwere and refuses to install it cuz he knows the quad would pwn his dualcore then.

In short, he's already stressing his crap IO sector. Someone tell him why he should drop his WD640.



Guys use my table.
If your getting a computer now, upgrade time is:

1 yr or less = dualcore
1.5 yrs or more = quadcore

the time between 1 yr and 1.5 yrs look at your budget.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Duals will be outdated faaaaaarrrrrr before quads will be.......

http://www.firingsquad.com/har..._performance/page3.asp

your 4Ghz OCed duallies will be outperformed by a Q6600 at stock....

By the time that is true, a Q6600 will be a dino.

 

[Gillbot]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: Gillbot

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Absolution75
The answer: Unless you play Crysis/UT3 a lot, a quadcore isn't faster than a dualcore in games.

That should be "Crysis, Crysis: Warhead, UT3, M$'s FSX, or Supreme Commander with maximum bots on large maps".

/beats dead horse more.

Kicks dead horse, to make sure it's actually dead.

I beg to differ. I did my own comparisons in Supcom and i get better framerates with a higher clocked dual core over the quad. I ran my quad at 3.7GHz and my dual at 4.5GHz and the dual whooped it.

emm..

Tell the boys what hard drive you had on that system Gill. :T

*running away really fast now b4 he smacks me off my high horse*

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Gillbot
I beg to differ. I did my own comparisons in Supcom and i get better framerates with a higher clocked dual core over the quad. I ran my quad at 3.7GHz and my dual at 4.5GHz and the dual whooped it.

Were you using the maximum allowed amount of bots? Because, according to the people who own it, the more bots you're using, the slower every dual-core becomes. BTW, OP, I'm definitely not recommending you get a quad. For the type of multitaking you've described, any decent dual-core could handle with one core tied behind it's back.

Myo he doesnt even have anything close to the newer gen drive. I think he's running a 80GIG OG Maxtor. :rofl:

He has a WD640 he's hiding somehwere and refuses to install it cuz he knows the quad would pwn his dualcore then.

In short, he's already stressing his crap IO sector. Someone tell him why he should drop his WD640.



Guys use my table.
If your getting a computer now, upgrade time is:

1 yr or less = dualcore
1.5 yrs or more = quadcore

the time between 1 yr and 1.5 yrs look at your budget.

I'd me more than happy to pwn j00 there Aigo.

I ran it with my 80GB Maxtor, my 250GB WD and ..... **DRUMROLL** the 640GB WD that was so heavily touted to solve my issues. Guess what the spread was... ZERO. (BTW Aigo, that drive has been in my rig since like a week after I got it. Where have you been?)

I have yet to find the magic combination that unlocks the extreme difference everyone claims there to be when it comes to supcom and dual/quad CPUs. I tried adding more ram for a total of 4GB and upgraded my "crappy" 80GB to the 250 then to the 640GB. The difference has NEVER been that large no matter what map, unit load and etc. They all perform nearly identical.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Gillbot

I have yet to find the magic combination that unlocks the extreme difference everyone claims there to be when it comes to supcom and dual/quad CPUs. I tried adding more ram for a total of 4GB and upgraded my "crappy" 80GB to the 250 then to the 640GB. The difference has NEVER been that large no matter what map, unit load and etc. They all perform nearly identical.

72km/72km map 8 AI's.

Cheat so you dont die in 3 min. :X

Edit: bah, lemme see if i can game with you this weekend.