Which of these two Dell's has the better CPU ?

[jaytone1]

Hi
I been out of the computer world for a while and am back in. I have two systems that were given to me because people didnt want to pay for upgrades, buying Windows 7 and they opted for new systems.

I would like to know first, which of these two cpu's are better and how much faster one might be than the other.
Intel Core 2 4400@2.00ghz
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200@2.33 ghz

Video cards
ATI HD3450
ATI (MSI) RX2400PRO

 

[Spicedaddy]

Q8200 is much better than E4400.

 

[Rhoxed]

Q8200 is much better than E4400.

this

 

[tweakboy]

Common sense. A quad will always beat a dual. I think you can answer this yourself hmmmm.

 

[tcsenter]

Common sense. A quad will always beat a dual.

Huh? No.

 

[toyota]

Common sense. A quad will always beat a dual. I think you can answer this yourself hmmmm.

you say something wrong almost every time you make a comment.

 

[aigomorla]

Common sense. A quad will always beat a dual. I think you can answer this yourself hmmmm.

Quad is most definitely better then a dual.

Huh? No.

In this case yeah, because the quad is clocked faster then the dual.

you say something wrong almost every time you make a comment.

There isnt anything wrong with his statement.

Im most all cases unless your an OCer, a quad is better then a dual.
And in this case, the Q8200 is a E0 variation, so yes, it is much better then the E4400 in all aspects including overclocking.

Oh wait the dual will win if your worried about the green house gas effect, and every last Voltage counts in saving the environment.

But then id say drive a hybrid instead of lowering your cpu.

 

[toyota]

Quad is most definitely better then a dual.



In this case yeah, because the quad is clocked faster then the dual.



There isnt anything wrong with his statement.

Im most all cases unless your an OCer, a quad is better then a dual.
And in this case, the Q8200 is a E0 variation, so yes, it is much better then the E4400 in all aspects including overclocking.

Oh wait the dual will win if your worried about the green house gas effect, and every last Voltage counts in saving the environment.

But then id say drive a hybrid instead of lowering your cpu.

he said "A quad will always beat a dual." that statement is wrong.

 

[aigomorla]

he said "A quad will always beat a dual." that statement is wrong.

a higher clocked quad will always beat a dual.

Because of the larger cache.

A lower clocked quad with higher cache could also beat a dual.

It would depend on the spread of the dual.

But quads now a days are clocked as high if not higher then duals.

 

[Arkaign]

Well, Aigo, while I largely agree, the statement still isn't exactly true.

Eg; an E8600 at stock will be better for many things than a Q8200 stock. Probably not with encoding, or in a handful of games that can use 4 cores, but in most games at the moment a high-clocked dual core with plenty of cache per core > a low clocked quad with ~2mb per core. Yes I know cache is shared dynamically with C2D/C2Q, but it seems to hold true. E8xxx are 6mb cache, no?

 

[Voo]

a higher clocked quad will always beat a dual.

Because of the larger cache.

A lower clocked quad with higher cache could also beat a dual.

It would depend on the spread of the dual.

But quads now a days are clocked as high if not higher then duals.

Well if he had said "a higher clocked quad with more cache always beats a dual" we surely would've all agreed, but he didn't and so the "always" statement is wrong.


Independent of how bad they are I'm rather sure that a i5-670 (still a dual core) beats most of the cheap AMD quad cores in the majority of benchmarks. A more practical example would be the one from Arkaign - I'd prefer my OCed e8400 over a q6600 for gaming everyday..

 

[Spikesoldier]

E8600 v Q6600 will be a nice matchup

 

[aigomorla]

Well, Aigo, while I largely agree, the statement still isn't exactly true.

Eg; an E8600 at stock will be better for many things than a Q8200 stock\

Ok... thats really not a fair comparison.

Take the highest dual core and compare it to one of the lowest quadcores?

How about comparing it to at least a Q9550 and see what happens?

It all depends on the spread.
And if were not overclocking, a QUAD will most definitely be faster then a dual.
Because you have the extra cache on the quad.

E8600 v Q6600 will be a nice matchup

Gah this is even worse... compare a 45nm to a 65nm?
At least the Q8200 kept the die sizes the same.

Well if he had said "a higher clocked quad with more cache always beats a dual" we surely would've all agreed, but he didn't and so the "always" statement is wrong.

When looking at dell tho, that comment always applies.

 

[ShawnD1]

1.8GHz Phenom X4

:awe:

 

[toyota]

1.8GHz Phenom X4

:awe:

wow that slow piece of crap is still 89 bucks. thats one quad that would get raped in most games by any midrange dual core.

 

[Shmee]

Quad is most definitely better then a dual.



In this case yeah, because the quad is clocked faster then the dual.



There isnt anything wrong with his statement.

Im most all cases unless your an OCer, a quad is better then a dual.
And in this case, the Q8200 is a E0 variation, so yes, it is much better then the E4400 in all aspects including overclocking.

Oh wait the dual will win if your worried about the green house gas effect, and every last Voltage counts in saving the environment.

But then id say drive a hybrid instead of lowering your cpu.

I believe only the higher C2Q have the E0 option. (Q9505 and above) The Q8200 comes in R0 and M1 i believe. They don't OC as well as the E0's, in general.

 

[Spikesoldier]

Gah this is even worse... compare a 45nm to a 65nm?
At least the Q8200 kept the die sizes the same..

e4400 is allendale 65nm.

i used the example e8600 vs q6600 in a max OC setting where a high clocked duallie with (tons) of cache compared to a quad at a slower frequency with less l2/core.

why compare apples to apples? (45nm vs 45nm) the core2 quads are nothing more than two duallie dies on the same package anyway. so comparing them would be predictable and boring.

the real fun is when you compare apples to oranges and see which can be the winner.

 

[Spikesoldier]

I believe only the higher C2Q have the E0 option. (Q9505 and above) The Q8200 comes in R0 and M1 i believe. They don't OC as well as the E0's, in general.

the quads arent their own chip or die. they use two duallie dies to achieve four cores on the same chip.

essentially the 4mb c2q's are two pentium dual core dies. the 6mb ones are two 3mb wolfdales. this is evident when you compare steppings. the 8mb kentsfield ones are two conroes.

think of the 12mb c2q's as two e8400+ dies. where is your OC limited? to whichever die is crappier.

 

[aigomorla]

the real fun is when you compare apples to oranges and see which can be the winner.

i'll bring in the watermelon then.

Im known to go big and screw people's comparisons up.

I believe only the higher C2Q have the E0 option. (Q9505 and above) The Q8200 comes in R0 and M1 i believe. They don't OC as well as the E0's, in general.

The R0 is a half cached E0.

 

[TJCS]

Q6600+1

Benchies of Duo vs Quad with same cache, die size, and varies apps using same clocks.