• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Building new gaming PC, need a processor

J

jimbo6846

Gawd
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
700
So, I'm building a new gaming PC soon. I was wondering if I should go Dual Core or Quad Core. I know that at the present, Dual Cores are better for gaming by a mildly noticeable margin. However, is it such a big increase over Quad Cores that I shouldn't consider getting the Quad Core? I've been going back and forth between the Q6600 (or Q9300) and the E8500. However, I've recently been reading about the E8600 and how it can easily be OC'd to 4.0Ghz, which sounds hard to pass up.

Any thoughts/suggestions? Last PC I built, I went with an AMD Dual Core 3800+, which I ended up regretting, because at the time Dual Cores were young and not good for gaming.
 
I have been going through the same thought process as you are. I wanted a E8500 as I didn't want to OC but did want 3Mhz. I was told to get the Q6600 and oc it easily to 3 mhz. That the Q6600 would handle the antivirus running while I gamed. All I do is play games in this computer but I an not convinced a quad is really what I need. Price isn't the issue as the costs are about the same.
I am just afraid that Q6600's are old tech now and if I by one and a new MB I will still be behind. Sry if this seems like hijacking The subject just seemed on my mind.
 
Cally said:
I have been going through the same thought process as you are. I wanted a E8500 as I didn't want to OC but did want 3Mhz. I was told to get the Q6600 and oc it easily to 3 mhz. That the Q6600 would handle the antivirus running while I gamed. All I do is play games in this computer but I an not convinced a quad is really what I need. Price isn't the issue as the costs are about the same.
I am just afraid that Q6600's are old tech now and if I by one and a new MB I will still be behind. Sry if this seems like hijacking The subject just seemed on my mind.
Click to expand...

No worries man, that's the exact situation I'm in. I'm currently leaning towards the E8600, but any and all input/suggestions/thoughts are welcome, I'm sure you feel the same. :)
 
I'd look at the dual cores.

Use quads if you're going to be using apps like Premiere, and After Effects, Maya, etc.

Dual cores are cheaper, run cooler, clock higher, and have some benefits over the old Q6600.

The E8600 is a little too expensive for my tastes. If you wish to save some money, and push the northbridge a little harder on your motherboard, get the E8500.

The cool thing about the E8600 is the 10x multiplier. So you could do 400x10 = 4GHz. The E8500 is $85 cheaper but has the 9.5x multi, so you'd have to play around 422x9.5 = 4GHz.
If you thing it is worth it...

The E8500 compared to the Q6600 = Lower NM, SSE4.1 (useless for games), More cache (games will like :) ), clock higher (might have some diminishing returns after a while, but it will clock higher then the quad).

And the E8600 compared the Q9400 and Q9450... the dual will clock higher, easier. The Q9450 could probably hit 4GHz, but not with out some heavy duty cooling - and most of the games of today don't benefit from more then two cores (There is some RTS game... I think... I forget the name that likes fast CPUs).
 
From all I've read and researched, the sweet spot seems to be the Q6600 or E8400 (or E3110). These are going to overclock well and stay cool, especially if you use an after-market cooler. There are several fine coolers available in the $30-$40 range. Once you get above 3Ghz, it is debatable whether or not you would see any performance increase at all. At these speeds, I would suggest you'd want to make sure you have as much RAM and as fast a video card as you can afford. The CPU won't be your bottleneck.

I can't see going with a quad unless you do some serious multitasking (and have apps that actually use all the cores).
 
The downsides of a quad core are the extra power use, extra heat and not quite as high overclocks.
If you intend on getting a new PSU or you already have one good enough, then going quad core isnt an issue unless you care about your power bill or cant control the heat.
If you need a CPU running at 4GHz+, the E8400 or higher is for you.

I'm running an E8400 at 4.1GHz and have not found any reason to get a quad core yet.
Theres no harm in getting a quad though but make sure you have enough power/cooling if you intend on clocking it.
 
I don't really know enough to know how to OC. I liked the E8500 because it was rated @3.16 mhz and that is fast enough for me. I use a aftermarket cooler because I like a more quiet system. My current psu is a OCZ Modstream 520 I was hoping to be able to continue to use it in the next build. I don't use any apps like Premiere, and After Effects, Maya. I just play one online game and do the usual e mails and surfing. I have one video card a Nvidia GTS 8800 640mb card. The current price seems ok for the cpu, better than the next step up. Pricing cpu,ram, and MB, cooler, I thought I could get everything for $435.00 shipped. Is that a good price? everyday I check prices hoping they will drop.
 
Cally said:
. Pricing cpu,ram, and MB, cooler, I thought I could get everything for $435.00 shipped. Is that a good price? everyday I check prices hoping they will drop.
Click to expand...

What are the parts specifically?
 
GIGABYTE GA-EP45-DS3R LGA 775 Intel P45 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Model #:GA-EP45-DS3R
Item #:N82E16813128344 $139.99 -$5.00 Instant $134.99

Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 3.16GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor Model BX80570E8500 - Retail
Model #:BX80570E8500
Item #:N82E16819115036 $189.99 $189.99

OCZ Platinum 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model OCZ2P10664GK - Retail
Model #:OCZ2P10664GK
Item #:N82E16820227298

Return Policy:Memory (Modules, USB) Return Policy
Out Of Stock
ETA: 9/2/2008 5:48:00 PM
Mail-in Rebate $129.99 -$20.00 Instant $109.99

XIGMATEK HDT-S1283 120mm Rifle CPU Cooler - Retail
Model #:HDT-S1283
Item #:N82E16835233003 Mail-in Rebate $34.99 $34.99

XIGMATEK ACK-I7751 Retention Bracket - Retail
Model #:ACK-I7751
Item #:N82E16835233019 $6.99 $6.99

I was a bit off on my dollar amount. $435.00 was what I had hope to spend. This totals out to $476.00. I could step down to a E8400 and save $20 not sure it is worth it. I am not sure how well this ram works with the board. These are all Newegg prices.
 
Cally said:
I was a bit off on my dollar amount. $435.00 was what I had hope to spend. This totals out to $476.00. I could step down to a E8400 and save $20 not sure it is worth it. I am not sure how well this ram works with the board. These are all Newegg prices.
Click to expand...

The E8400 will be fine. Also, you may as well go with cheaper DDR2-800 or DDR2-667 memory to save some more money since you won't be overclocking. Looks good to me aside from that.
 
EDIT : Nvm, will have to say, OP, you should give OCing a try.

The reason why people pay more for the faster chips (if they OC them) is almost stickily for the higher multiplier. If you only want a 3.2GHz-3.6 OC, the 8x on the E8400 is perfect. You even choose a P45 board!
 
you can hit 3.6 ghz on the e8400 very easily. mine will do 4ghz with a little vcore. the e8600 is the new stepping and will almost hit 4ghz with stock vcore. everyone seems to get 4.4 for a 24/7 setting. i got 4.5 pretty easily.
 
Nenu said:
The downsides of a quad core are the extra power use, extra heat and not quite as high overclocks.
If you intend on getting a new PSU or you already have one good enough, then going quad core isnt an issue unless you care about your power bill or cant control the heat.
If you need a CPU running at 4GHz+, the E8400 or higher is for you.

I'm running an E8400 at 4.1GHz and have not found any reason to get a quad core yet.
Theres no harm in getting a quad though but make sure you have enough power/cooling if you intend on clocking it.
Click to expand...

I'm planning on getting a Silverstone 750 or higher, with modular cabling. I plan on trying to OC. I've done some mild OC'ing in the past, but now I'd really like to give it a go.
 
The general consensus seems to be that the dual core CPU's are better for gaming, OC'ing and temp/power efficient, so that is the way I will go. I'm going to go with the E8600. I had originally planned on getting a nVidia videocard, so I was going to go with the 780i chipset motherboards. I have since changed my mind after seeing what the Radeon 4870x2's are capable of, so I now need to start my motherboard research over. Does anyone have any suggestions for quality motherboards that are good for overclocking? Also, I was planning on getting DDR2 1066 RAM, any suggestions there?

Thanks for the help guys :)
 
This may seem a bit contradictory but I feel you should be aware of what is coming soon...

Personally I wont have a quad core until it is needed for sure as I am electricity bill conscious and already have a good dualie.
If electricity consumption isnt a concern I recommend getting a quad core as there are a couple of games that a quad core helps and that will increase.
The focus for game developers is moving towards multi core use now because that is where future hardware performance increases will be coming from.
It makes sense to run Physics/PhysX CPU code on separate thread(s) as well as a single/multi-threaded game engine, so 4 cores are ideal.
(note that some PhysX code has to run on the CPU)
 
Nenu said:
This may seem a bit contradictory but I feel you should be aware of what is coming soon...

Personally I wont have a quad core until it is needed for sure as I am electricity bill conscious and already have a good dualie.
If electricity consumption isnt a concern I recommend getting a quad core as there are a couple of games that a quad core helps and that will increase.
The focus for game developers is moving towards multi core use now because that is where future hardware performance increases will be coming from.
It makes sense to run Physics/PhysX CPU code on separate thread(s) as well as a single/multi-threaded game engine, so 4 cores are ideal.
(note that some PhysX code has to run on the CPU)
Click to expand...

I considered that. But way back when I built the PC I'm currently using, I went with a AMD Dual Core CPU, because I was on that train of thought. It ended up being a bad decision because even though games had started being made with Dual Core support, they still ran better on Single Core CPU's with higher clock speeds. I can't be certain that this is what will happen this time, but the situations are very similar, so this time I'm going to go with the CPU that is currently better for gaming. Should it ever come down to Quad Core's being better, I can always upgrade my CPU later.
 
I would definteily go with a dual core wolfdale. Even if a program is quad core, there are so few, it doesn't interest me.
 
I really don't see any need for me to go Quad. I just play the one game, surf, and email, no editing or music downloading. Just a simple useage for me.
 
If you have the cash, more is always better.

In the next few years more games will just begin taking advantage of more than 2 cores, so you have a little bit of wiggle room there, but the time is coming fast when 4 cores will help out or even be required for good performance.

The cutoff point right now for performance in games is about 3 GHz on Core2 processors. That will change as videocards get more powerful but thats another thing to keep in mind.
 
Volcanon said:
If you have the cash, more is always better.

In the next few years more games will just begin taking advantage of more than 2 cores, so you have a little bit of wiggle room there, but the time is coming fast when 4 cores will help out or even be required for good performance.

The cutoff point right now for performance in games is about 3 GHz on Core2 processors. That will change as videocards get more powerful but thats another thing to keep in mind.
Click to expand...

Honestly, at this point I'm thinking that by the time that games are built around multi-core processors, we'll have access to faster, more efficient CPU's that the Quad Cores we have today. I might as well stick with what's good now and worry about multi-core processors later on down the road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top