Upgrade an E8600 @ 4.1GHz to Quad core (non-gamer)

[aamsel]

I currently am running an E8600 happily at 4.1GHz smooth and cool as a cucumber on a P5Q Deluxe with 8GB DDR2-1000 Dominators. I am not a gamer at all, and am considering dropping in a Q9550, or going to a 750 or 860 with new mobo and RAM. I don't do anything all that demanding, but find that there are web-surfing lags with the dual core doing simple things like burning a DVD.

I am adding X25-M to help eliminate any disk i/o hesitation when doing tasks such as DVD and Blu-Ray burning while surfing and doing simple office tasks, but I had hoped that going to a quad-core of some type would help smooth some of this out.

Again, not multi-tasking at is toughest, but some video/audio encoding, DVD and Blu-Ray ripping and Blu-Ray data recording, etc. Also, I have a full appreciation for fast PC's, even when doing simple tasks.

Which would be the most noticeable upgrade, or am I wasting my time/money?

 

[lopri]

Yes, you're wasting money, except on SSDs.

 

[CurseTheSky]

"...but find that there are web-surfing lags with the dual core doing simple things like burning a DVD."

Unless you're running an insane amount of applications at the same time (4-5 instances of Firefox each with 10 tabs open, plus a virus scan, Microsoft Word, IM client, and various other programs, you're not going to feel any benefit from a quad core. Even if you were, you'd be greatly memory limited before you hit the limit of a modern dual core.

The SSD should help to eliminate stuttering from disk I/O, but other than that, I'd keep what you have.

 

[aamsel]

"...but find that there are web-surfing lags with the dual core doing simple things like burning a DVD."

Unless you're running an insane amount of applications at the same time (4-5 instances of Firefox each with 10 tabs open, plus a virus scan, Microsoft Word, IM client, and various other programs, you're not going to feel any benefit from a quad core. Even if you were, you'd be greatly memory limited before you hit the limit of a modern dual core.

The SSD should help to eliminate stuttering from disk I/O, but other than that, I'd keep what you have.

You have gone to an i7 860 setup.
Do you ever experience the same surfing lags while burning that I do?

I had understood that Windows 7, being more multi-core aware and capable, would manage even its overhead better with 4 cores? And wouldn't virus scanning real-time use some bandwidth that could be better spread out?

I will have (next week) 2 x 160GB Gen 2 X25-M's, just deciding (also) whether to run them separately or as RAID 0 in ICH10R?

Would an 860 not be faster for some of what I do now, or might do?
No, I am not doing 3-D modeling or CAD.

However, I just downloaded and started using the new Handbrake tonight, and understand that it supports multiple cores and threads, and assume that there are, and will be other utilities such as this soon?

I do very much appreciate and have a feel for fast, smooth PC's.

 

[MikeShunt]

there are web-surfing lags with the dual core doing simple things like burning a DVD.

This could be somthing as simple as a driver issue.

 

[spinejam]

i have an e3110 (e8400) @4050mhz and a q9550 @4000mhz and they are both quick and responsive. if so inclined, upgrade to an ssd or raid 0 w/ 2 WD 1TB blacks. that will solve any hd i/o issues. are you sure it's not your internet connection / web-server causing your stuttering???

 

[aamsel]

It is not drivers, or internet connection.
I have see variations of this for 15 years since low-powered
single core and the advent of CD burners.

I have witnessed the progression of powerful CPU's starting with
the 8088, and remember thinking that nothing could be faster than
a 486-25 with 16MB in it!

In early single-core times, you would start a CD burning and
walk away from the machine. With more powerful Pentium setups,
it was possible to do other things while burning, but there often
would be stammers, stutters, etc. when the burning process should
really have been left alone to do its thing.

I am not a stranger to having the source material for the burning on
a different drive than the OS/Boot drive, I do that all the time.

I may not have explained it correctly - there is very, very little hesitation
on the E8600 setup while burning DVD's or Blu-Ray data disks and surfing or
other apps. They are tiny, but they are there, and can only be attributed to
the burning process, since these are the only time I see them. These, again are
not huge, not like a busy website, or one that is going to time-out, just tiny
stammers/stutters that can be felt.

Perhaps the 1, or 2 X25-M's will make a difference, but I hoped that a 860 or
Q9550 (or 920) would give the firepower to smooth this out?

 

[Indus]

You know what.. that's a simple $10 fix. Buy a network interface card such as d-link and use that for connection vs your motherboard ethernet port. Some are buggy and cause lag when your motherboard is working on dedicating its power for burning so it hiccups the internet connection somehow. Your CPU upgrade won't help as much as that.

And I had the problem too. But I leave it to you what to do entirely

Edit: reducing the cache in your browser will help too.

 

[GrumpyMan]

Are your CD burners IDE or SATA?

 

[aamsel]

You know what.. that's a simple $10 fix. Buy a network interface card such as d-link and use that for connection vs your motherboard ethernet port. Some are buggy and cause lag when your motherboard is working on dedicating its power for burning so it hiccups the internet connection somehow. Your CPU upgrade won't help as much as that.

And I had the problem too. But I leave it to you what to do entirely

Edit: reducing the cache in your browser will help too.

OK, thx.

Are your CD burners IDE or SATA?

SATA, but I have seen this since they were IDE.

 

[Thor86]

What tests have you run on your current OC? You should not be seeing this stutter for your setup, unless your OC is not stable, or could be chipset drivers.

 

[aamsel]

What tests have you run on your current OC? You should not be seeing this stutter for your setup, unless your OC is not stable, or could be chipset drivers.

I have run every test that is discussed on the forums.
This is not a new setup.
It has been fully, 100% functional and stable for well over a year now.

Chipset drivers are current, and I have a Pioneer BDR-203 blu-ray burner,
Velociraptor, X25-M and many other drives all have performed perfectly
on it with this one exception.

Again, it really isn't a "stutter". That isn't the best word to describe it.

It is a hesitation getting to webpages that is not seen when burning is not
occurring. And, yes, I know that webpage response varies from nanosecond to
nanosecond.

 

[nyker96]

if you are non gamer can consider x4 620, no L3 cache so it's not for gamers but runs average apps quite well. I'm running one at 3,25 and it's already much snappier on average apps than my E7200@3,5. like when I did virus scan in the e7xxx setup everything else just like stopped. now when AVG does a scan I don't feel it at all like it's not even there. Also this x4 really is excellent for my other Os Ubuntu, compilations goes a lot faster than e7200. BTW, I paid about 180 for the new mb+cpu. also the x4 is much faster in h264 encoding than my old rig a little over 75% faster. One more reason for choosing x4 over i5 is to keep using my 8gb ddr2s. after selling off my old parts the upgrade is about 50 dollars.

but if you are happy with your e8400/4.1 why upgrade now?

 

[aamsel]

ttt

 

[adlep]

I currently am running an E8600 happily at 4.1GHz smooth and cool as a cucumber on a P5Q Deluxe with 8GB DDR2-1000 Dominators. I am not a gamer at all, and am considering dropping in a Q9550, or going to a 750 or 860 with new mobo and RAM. I don't do anything all that demanding, but find that there are web-surfing lags with the dual core doing simple things like burning a DVD.

I am adding X25-M to help eliminate any disk i/o hesitation when doing tasks such as DVD and Blu-Ray burning while surfing and doing simple office tasks, but I had hoped that going to a quad-core of some type would help smooth some of this out.

Again, not multi-tasking at is toughest, but some video/audio encoding, DVD and Blu-Ray ripping and Blu-Ray data recording, etc. Also, I have a full appreciation for fast PC's, even when doing simple tasks.

Which would be the most noticeable upgrade, or am I wasting my time/money?

If you have Vista, dump it for WIndows 7 first and foremost. C2D at 4.1GHZ is insanely fast. You should be able to burn a DVD and surf the web lag free on a C2D 1.8GHZ or Pentium D...
IF you can feel the lag, there is something else at fault.

 

[aamsel]

ttt

 

[Indus]

I am guessing that an i7 would have more overall power than my fast C2D and generally
be able to deal with more operations in a smoother manner.

Go for it. Personally as a gamer, I think in terms of framerate rather than other applications so for me the upgrade isn't worth it but for you it might be.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Yes, you're wasting money, except on SSDs.

I agree with this. Get an SSD and upgrade to Windows 7. That's all you "need."

 

[TurtleCrusher]

If you have Vista, dump it for WIndows 7 first and foremost.

Terrible advice. Vista and 7 are practically the same thing. I went back and forth, but stuck with Vista as Windows 7 offered no tangible benefits. It made just about as much sense as dumping Windows 2000 for XP.

 

[Markfw]

Terrible advice. Vista and 7 are practically the same thing. I went back and forth, but stuck with Vista as Windows 7 offered no tangible benefits. It made just about as much sense as dumping Windows 2000 for XP.

I think you are right on the first one (sort of) except Win 7 seems to have better support than Vista ever had.

However, Windows 2000 and XP are way different animals. I have both. I actually like Windows 2000 the best of everything so far, in many respects, but it loads way slower than XP, and has a few other quirks.

 

[Visaoni]

I think somebody just wants a shiny new i7. It's been said more than once that it will not help, but you keep coming up with ideas.

I think we've all been there at some point. Eventually I decided I couldn't rationalize it unless I had the money for it burning a hole in my pocket - which I don't. If you do, just go for it. As long as you realize you are upgrading because it's fun and not because you need it, why not?

 

[Marty502]

As long as you realize you are upgrading because it's fun and not because you need it, why not?

Best advice yet.

I sure get the itch to build a new rig but I honestly don't need it. Would it be fun? Hell yeah.
Would I do it if I had the cash? Probably no, I've got other priorities.
But if you can afford it, it's good fun and we all know it.