Print

[$hellCoder]

Here's a topic that is floating around in my head:

What is better for a gaming PC:

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0Ghz with FSB: 1333mhz
OR
Intel Core 2 Quad QX6600 2.4Ghz with FSB: 1066mhz

I suspect the former will be more efficient for gaming, but I am unsure and way too lazy right now to read what Tom's Hardware might have on the subject.  Anyone here read about the differences regarding gaming?  The way I see it, I won't need to have 2 additional cores to run one game unless the game is written to take advantage of those additional cores and the fact that the faster clock rate will help in loading times.

[GenTsoChiken]

yea, there really aren't that many games out there that would use multiple cores that i know of. the ones we play now sure as hell dont :p

[Popsikle]

The unreal and doom 3 engines use multiple cores.  With windows you can also set affinities to multiple cores so you can tell apps to run on one of the other (preventing overload).

I see multiple cores become standard really shortly and I see game dev's realizing this soon as well ;P  Thats said, quad cores seems to excessive for a gaming machine for quite some time to come.

[$hellCoder]

I'm building a new rig in mid-late october.  Both CPU's are within my budget, one being about $300, the other being $550, but I'd rather save the $250 and get the E6850 also since it has faster clock rates.

[NightStalkerKiji]

I like AMD. Not an Intel person.

Only because AMD is more gaming friendly in my opinion, plus its allot less money then an Intel CPU, I mean it does the same thing. Just mabey it take 2 seconds longer then the Intel CPU's, well hell it it saves me a 100 dollars ill wait 2 seconds.

wow glowing font sweet

[ArchoN]

i just got a quadcore.  yes, its excessive, but its expandable to 8 gigs of memory as opposed to 4 that the dual-cores can max out on.  The way I see it, I won't need to buy any new computers for several ..several years.   I also put in a Nvidia GeForce 8800GTS (which is HUGE... almost didn't fit), so I'm all set with video for a few years as well.

Mostly, the quadcore is just as effective as having a Ferrari when you live in mountainous terrain (like CT), its just to show everyone that you HAVE one.  Aside from my memory expandability reason, there is no other reason (yet) to have 4 cpu's... its 200$ extra for something that you won't need

[Popsikle]

I dunno man, my x2 was cheap and IIRC does 8Gb of ram just fine ;/

[NightStalkerKiji]

I beleve quade core to be some what of a sham, beuace u don't need it but they dangle it in front of your face like food.

[AMDinside]

Man, I feel so left out.  I am still running my single core 64-bit 3000+ 

[NightStalkerKiji]

Ha, oh burn

[johnnysocko]

spend the extra money on more video!

[$hellCoder]

LOL, this thread started because I said I could afford either.

As for video, Johnny, I'm getting an nVidia 8800 Ultra 768mb

How much better could I get ?

[Popsikle]

That new job must be paying you good. You guys hiring? ;p

[$hellCoder]

lol, it's the truth though...

actually, the only reason I got the job was because someone voluntarily left (doesn't happen very much where I work).

KIJI, wanted to let you know that I like whatever cpu company that delivers the best product.  From 2000 --> 2006, that was AMD in my opinion (also based on benchmarking).  But since beginning of 2006 with the advent of Intel Core Duo and the subsequent products based on it, it seems Intel is manufacturing the better product these days.  I really only get a new computer every 3 years, so I essentially like to go with the best that money will buy assuming I can afford it at the time(within reason [ie: not $600+ cpu's]).

[coldflame]

I got an AMD Socket AM2 running 2.0ghz dual core
It handles any game just fine
SupCom also uses both cores fyi.
Now, my friend has QuadCore and nothing good has come of it
He has majoral problems
But I'm with you on the 8800GTS, I bought one myself, it's flipping huge. Lucky, I got a Thermaltake Armor Series BIZOTCH!