• 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.

Dual core and performance...

  • Thread starter Deleted member 21895
  • Start date
A64 if youre going to be gaming more than 4 hours a week. Pentium if you do less than 4, and do more Windows work, and more encoding. SLI is on the intel platforum now too so youw ont have much trouble finding a nice rig.
 
My Pentium D 820 with a 6600gt plays every game 100% now. If you go overboard and get 2 7800GTX's you'll be able to play any game for the next few years on that system, plus have far better encoding/multitasking support than a single core CPU if you opt for the dual core.
 
Dillusion said:
A64 if youre going to be gaming more than 4 hours a week. Pentium if you do less than 4, and do more Windows work, and more encoding. SLI is on the intel platforum now too so youw ont have much trouble finding a nice rig.
Click to expand...


What's the difference if you play more than 4 hours a week with a 64 or Intel? I doubt you can tell the gap between it. If you can't tell the differences between the two, why the hell does it matter to get which chips? Forget about the benchmark, if you can't tell then don't even waste your money.
 
With such a high-end video subsystem, you should be fine to play any current or near-future games @ 1680 with ops on, matched with either of the processors you are considering.

Personally I would go the dual-core route to benefit you on the general use and encoding side of things. Also consider that as time goes on, more applications and games are going to be coded for multithreading and making better use of the dual core processors available.
 
vat said:
What's the difference if you play more than 4 hours a week with a 64 or Intel? I doubt you can tell the gap between it. If you can't tell the differences between the two, why the hell does it matter to get which chips? Forget about the benchmark, if you can't tell then don't even waste your money.
Click to expand...

Athlon64's excel in gaming. If you game more than ~4 hours that means youre pretty into gaming, and you want the extra performance boost where it matters most- in games.

I own a 570J, and I game a hell of allot more than 4 hours, and its great- i get just as many FPS as my friends 3500/3400+'s. but im also a graphics designer and i do allot of windows work with 25 windows open.

sniper991122 said:
I do a lot of everything really, probably game maybe an hour a day on average? (7-10 hours a week I'd say)

so is it better to get like a 3.4ghz p4 and take it up to 4ghz or so?

What kind of performance differences is there in a dual core compared to a single core @ 4ghz? Would the dual core be my bottleneck if I had a 7800gtx sli configuration? (assuming of course, 2 gigs of low latency memory ddr2, etc...)
Click to expand...

A 3.4ghz P4 is great. I built my friends a 3.4ghz right and it does everything he needs it to do, games and all. 3.4ghz kinda is the middle of the hill with P4's. With 3.0 being the standard and 3.8 being the highest, 3.4 is safe for a good while, as 3.8 will be intels top dog for another year yet single core-wise.

Dual cores will excel in application performance, but thats not to say a speedier P4 with HT wont do it just aswell...
 
sniper991122 said:
Seeing how amd is widening the gap in single core against intel, intels dual core processors are more than half the price of amds dual core...

So my question is this... If i want a computer that is very gaming capable as well as being good at encoding movies and all sorts of other general stuff should I go with dual core or single core?

ie, 6 months from now im expecting to have a 7800gtx sli (or something arguably equally comparable, maybe a x800xt crossfire configuration) with 2 gigs of ddr2 533 (or higher) memory..

would I want to go with.. lets say the dual core intel (the D 3.0ghz) processor? Or would I be better off going with an a64? It seems for general things, the dual core would be the winner for most everything... but gaming... how would it compare? (not asking you to compare it to the a64, I can imagine how it would do but against an equally comparable single core intel) such as a 3.0ghz p4 vs a 3.0ghz dual core p4?

basically, what kind of numbers are the dual core processors putting up? Is it worth the price for the performance? Is there a future for single core?
Click to expand...

Read this review ?

Donnie27
 
I don’t really understand why so many people have the mentality that just because something came out that is faster, all the other stuff is now obsolete. I don’t have a dual core chip, but I do have good ol’ dual processors (see sig) so it should be reasonably comparable. There is not a game on this PLANET that I can’t play with good FPS on my box, and not only that, but I usually play at pretty high resolutions with AF and AA cranked up pretty high. Would an athlon give me even better FPS? Sure it would. But you have to keep in mind that you can get a Dual core Pentium for under $250. That’s just insane. So you end up with a computer that plays games just fine but can multitask better than any single core chip could ever dream of.

I have two friends with a64 3500+ systems that I pretty much built for them. They are no slouch when it comes to gaming, but after being on a Dual system for 2 years, you just kinda get spoiled I guess. You forget that things like background virus scans, etc actually slow some computers down. Things like people copying stuff from my computer at LANparties, the CPU usage when using software raid, the CPU usage when running background virus scans, the CPU usage when running background defrag, etc, etc, etc. When you run a computer with more than one processor/core, these things become completely insignificant. You also almost never have that single processor situation when one thing is hogging the processor and you actually have to wait for it to finish before your box feels snappy again. I can have a million things going at once yet opening another browser window, etc is always almost instantaneous. That’s what going dual gives you.

AND it can still play games.

Now don't get me wrong, I think the ultimate setup would be an AthlonX2 on an SLI board, but for those of us who aren't millionaires, the Pentium D is nice choice.
 
Pentium D also excels in 3DMark 2005 cpu test as well as the new PCMark 2005 benchmark which looks towards the future, which is why the makers are futuremark yayayayaya
 
sniper991122 said:
well Ideally, I was looking for a dual cpu sli motherboard... If you know of one that is really good, I would be happy to jump on it and not let go...

I agree with you, the idea of dual processors is a dream to me... Ideally I'd love to have dual core dual processors (I work at an aquarium where they have servers with quad xeons and stuff like that so I get spoiled thinking whats acceptable on the consumer end and whats not) but I would be happy to go with a dual processor system.. that way I could get a better processor for gaming and have the ability to have two processors for running the other stuff in the background...

or hell, the 3 ghz Pentium Ds are $300, if theres a mobo with the sockets I would love for a dual processor dual core...
Click to expand...

MSI K8N Master2-FAR, hasnt hit US stores yet tho, only available overseas. Dual Socket 940 NF4 Professional with SLI.
 
Dillusion said:
Athlon64's excel in gaming. If you game more than ~4 hours that means youre pretty into gaming, and you want the extra performance boost where it matters most- in games.

I own a 570J, and I game a hell of allot more than 4 hours, and its great- i get just as many FPS as my friends 3500/3400+'s. but im also a graphics designer and i do allot of windows work with 25 windows open.



A 3.4ghz P4 is great. I built my friends a 3.4ghz right and it does everything he needs it to do, games and all. 3.4ghz kinda is the middle of the hill with P4's. With 3.0 being the standard and 3.8 being the highest, 3.4 is safe for a good while, as 3.8 will be intels top dog for another year yet single core-wise.

Dual cores will excel in application performance, but thats not to say a speedier P4 with HT wont do it just aswell...
Click to expand...

You sure about that?

Pentium 4 580j

I don't remember where I saw the map, but there's other things Intel will be doing like VT and etc.... These models will move through a number like 680, 690, through 693 just to name a few. In fact, 5x1 with 64bit are starting to ship in numbers, maybe the guys here could review one?

Sure Intel is not about to toot the 4GHz horn after the bad PR of *their MHz crap-o-la but that doesn't mean it's not fast.

Donnie27
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top