I read from the Inquirer that soon Intel will release quad core parts. So how much real life performance improvements they will provide? And do you think it is worth it to wait for them or buy a Conroe now?
Should I buy Conroe now or wait for quad core?
- Thread starter imported_Someone2
- Start date
Little to no improvement for games, impressive improvement for media encoding (assuming you've got good hard drive layout to source the data fast enough to keep the CPU at full pace).
Waiting is a mug's game.
Waiting is a mug's game.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Honestly you can not go wrong at any point of the game if you pick accordingly. Months ago you could have gotten an opty 165 or x2 3800+ as the best overall pick and it is still is a great system. CPU benchmarks don't necessarily translate into everyday use and gaming, so don't worry about the idea that something will be faster later down the line. Now you can get e6x00 and it is the same story as before. It is a great chip and I would be happy with either.
Like the Capt said, if you are going for an extreme edition part then wait, otherwise then it doesn't make a difference to buy now or later since even prices will likely be the same.
Well, the first quad core cpu will be very expensive, if a high price is not an issue, get it, it's a 4 cores Cpu.
Mainly,video encoding will benefit from a quad core Cpu right now, including HD video encoding. Some incoming games will also benefit from quad core Cpus like Alan Wake...but right now except from video encoding...you won't see any real difference between a Dual core and a Quad core, so my suggestion is to wait till prices drop.
I will get one when the mainstream Core 2 Quads hit the streets....and prices drop significantly.
Mainly,video encoding will benefit from a quad core Cpu right now, including HD video encoding. Some incoming games will also benefit from quad core Cpus like Alan Wake...but right now except from video encoding...you won't see any real difference between a Dual core and a Quad core, so my suggestion is to wait till prices drop.
I will get one when the mainstream Core 2 Quads hit the streets....and prices drop significantly.
I would wait for the 8 core CPU's. Why get anything now? They will always have something "better" tomorrow.
Inquirer says that quad core parts are coming in mid-November and that there's also a 2.4GHz model coming..
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34863
Though I have no intention of buying a CPU that costs a lot more than 300$, so I have no interest in Extreme editions.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34863
Though I have no intention of buying a CPU that costs a lot more than 300$, so I have no interest in Extreme editions.
n7
Elite Member
- Jan 4, 2004
- 21,281
- 4
- 81
I figure might as well wait for octo core or 16 cores.
Heck, why not wait for 32 cores.
Nah, sarcasm aside, there really are going to be few benefits with quad core for normal use.
If you spend your days rendering massive or encoding massive amounts of video, then maybe.
But something you have to understand is that C2D isn't all hyped up because it's dual core.
We've has dual core for a while now.
C2D is hyped up because its single-threaded performance > all.
Sure, the fact it's dual core is great, but until software does some catching up, the benefits of quad core will be minimal.
Heck, why not wait for 32 cores.
Nah, sarcasm aside, there really are going to be few benefits with quad core for normal use.
If you spend your days rendering massive or encoding massive amounts of video, then maybe.
But something you have to understand is that C2D isn't all hyped up because it's dual core.
We've has dual core for a while now.
C2D is hyped up because its single-threaded performance > all.
Sure, the fact it's dual core is great, but until software does some catching up, the benefits of quad core will be minimal.
In terms of everyday usage then quad won't give much more to the end user than dual core.
However TeAm Anandtech could always use your extra cores.
However TeAm Anandtech could always use your extra cores.
Then it just depends on how long you can wait. ... Because you'll be waiting a while for Core 2 Quad to get below $300.
What are you running now?
Personally with all my VMware, Dev work, and recent jump into re-encoding TV shows... I'm seriously considering the Core 2 Quad Extreme Edition. It seems like the first chip worthy of an "Extreme" name. At the very least I'm waiting for the Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz @ $500-$600 ... the $400 saving should help go towards one of the shiny new 8800GTXs. (Lan Parties and Gaming are my other big draw.)
but i thought 'Alan Wake' is a game that will spawn 5 threads. Quad core with hyperthreading will be able to dedicate a 'whole effective' cpu to each thread and i thought they said dual cores will choke? A sign of things to come?
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
The Q6600 which is the non-extreme edition mentioned will still go for $500-600. Don't expect a quad-core for $300 til end of 2007 at the earliest and not til probably 2008.
sounds like an abuse of multicore technology...but yea i'd go dual core now. quad core will cost you a grip for the price you'd probably be able to get an impressive 2 core machine.
If you do buy now (which there is nothing wrong in doing so) just make sure your mobo is quad core compatible. That way when you are ready to go quad you wont need to buy another mobo.
The Q6700 will be one of the extreme CPUs so it will be very expensive. Just get an e6400 or e6600 and be happy for the moment.
At the rate they're going that will only be another few years, but in the meantime the Next version of Windows will probably only run on 16-core or better.
I wonder how much Intel stock Mr. Gates owns?
Originally posted by: Ealdric
...the Next version of Windows will probably only run on 16-core or better.
I wonder how much Intel stock Mr. Gates owns?
What are you talking about? Every version of windows including Vista runs fine on a single core CPU and last I checked Windows works quite well on AMD CPUs as well.
If you are building a Media Encoding or folding system then wait for quad core, otherwise get a Conroe. A lot of programs haven't taken advantage of dual core yet; it will be years before a quad core is a must for gaming and the Core 2 Duos are exceptionally powerful.
That's true. However, let us be fair here. Windows has become more bloated and bogged down with each new release. Which means you need more powerful hardware to keep up the same level of performance as the previous Windows release. The conspiracy theorists among us have always suggested Intel and Microsoft are in bed together to keep us upgrading and buying new products.
Vista runs slower than XP on identical hardware. Yes, it "runs fine" on that single core machine, but slower than XP :laugh:
My earlier post in this topic was intended to be Humorous on both counts.
I apologize if I did not make that sufficiently clear.
Please also note the post which I quoted.
I apologize if I did not make that sufficiently clear.
Please also note the post which I quoted.
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter