• 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 Vs. Quad Gaming Benchmarks?

P

PHeeNIxx

n00b
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
52
Are there any solid and recent benchmarks/articles measuring the performance difference between dual and quad core Intel processors on games that supposedly take advantage of multiple cores? I'm thinking of Crysis mainly since I've heard it is designed to benefit from multiple cores but I have no idea to what extent. Supreme commander maybe?

Basically, I'm trying to decide between E8400 and Q9450 .... I know I can get the E8400 for $150 cheaper and most likely get a better overclock out of it. I just want to know if even now, in real word gaming examples, a quad core will show any real improvement over a similarly clocked dual.

I've heard about the valve multi core particle simulation running twice as fast on quads vs duals, but that's nothing more than a synthetic benchmark at this point.

The idea of the quad definitely makes my e-penis happy, but I'd like some real evidence to push me towards it, to see its potential in gaming. I get the impression that any system crushers like Crysis are so much more bound by the GPU than the CPU that even if it is using 4 cores it won't translate into any real fps advantages.
 
I believe you have answered your question...
Daul is better option for next year... Then you can go for Nahalem.... E8400 is optimum now...
 
This can give you kind of an idea...
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html
you can look at say the q6600 and e6600 (same clocks and see the quad is slightly faster, but these tests (games) are mostly single core so anything multithreaded would run better.
Semi Old games on that chart though. But clock for clock they are the same if 1 single core is used, but there is that headroom and future proofing.
It really depends what you do the most and how long until you upgrade again.

Strictly games and you plan on upgrading in a year, I would get a dual core and OC the shit out of it, but with a 2 year upgrade plan i would go quad.
If you multitask and game then you may enjoy a quad more, you really have to make the decision whether it is worth it to you or not, but most games you probably wont notice a difference either way right now (maybe slightly in crysis, but nothing ground breaking until multithreaded games takes off more)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top