Originally posted by: razor2025
Originally posted by: bob4432
Originally posted by: gobucks
if you're an overclocker, then definitely get the dual core. it should OC to at least 2.4GHz, and some hit like 2.7-2.8GHz, so the lower speed penalty will vanish. in the long run the dual core will be better. more and more software is being written with multithreading, and even games are getting in on this - oblivion runs much better on a dual core for example.
he is, according to his example, not a hardcore o/cer with a 200MHz o/cer. op - no disrespect meant....but a 3800 x2 would be basically 2x what you have and in single threaded games, they will usually get 1 dedicated core while all the other background stuff is handled by the other one.
Sorry, but you're too naive. Making threads in games that perfectly utilize dual-core is programming wet dream. If you've had a decent amount of knowledge in software programming/architecture, you'll find out that putting codes in separate threads is not easy, let alone make them 100% efficient.
Dual-Core will give you some bit of performance boost, but it'll be hardly significant overall. Most of the current/near-future games will only offload minor roles to the 2nd core, so you will definitely not see a 2x boost.
Even with what I wrote above, I would still vote for X2 though. The cost of moving up from 3800+ Venice (~$100) to 3800+ X2 (~$150) is pretty minor. Assuming you're on Socket 939, the X2 will be your last CPU on that platform. Overclock it to 2.4-2.5ghz (easily done even with stock cooler), you'll have enough CPU power to last another year or more. By then, if you upgrade, you'll be force to ditch the entire platform altogether (CPU/RAM/MOBO).
Btw, being able to alt-tab easily out of games to answering IM and changing songs in WinAmp alone made the $160 I spent on getting the X2 well worth it.