Quad significantly better than Duo for gaming?

[Gillbot]

I normally play skirmish, me v 6-7 AI so yes, it has been tried. Yes, I normally die. LOL!

 

[Spike]

Eh, whatever. Buy a quad if you have more cash, buy a dual if you want slightly faster frames in most games. Either way it does not matter with the current gen of games, there are no examples where the game is playable with one and not with the other. All the examples I have seen show meaningless gains like 130 fps vs 100 or 13 vs 10. Sure both are 30% improvements over the other (due to either more cores or faster speed) but neither really means anything.

SupCom is the only game that comes close to justifying a quad but in the benchies I have seen the difference is so small it does not really matter. Bottom line by the time the number of cores makes or breaks a game the current gen of both will be outdated.

 

[I800C0LLECT]

I haven't noticed a real difference except in situations where 280's are SLI'ed playing Crysis with an overclock above 4GHz on the quad.

At that point the processor is obviously the bottle neck and you can see a gain of about 20fps. The assumption is that you're running SLi for 2560 res. That's where the real gains are noticed and only for those two or three games that might be able to use the power of a quad.

I say stick to an E84 or 85 and hit 4GHz with one of them. Much less heat running around your case.

 

[Gillbot]

Originally posted by: 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.

Get a better connection and we'll game. You are too laggy.