taking the leap....finally

McClintoc

McClintoc

Fully [H]
2FA
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
17,395
As you can see in my sig, my current rig is outdated. I am finally going to build a new rig and join the multi-core processor/PCIe crowd! My only thing is, dual core or quad core? I am going to build a gaming rig and I am curious as to which I would get better performance out of: a dual core @ 3.0 ghz or a quad core @ 2.5 ghz? As in, which is better: the number of CPU cores or the CPU clock speed? As for my term of "better performance," I am looking to play the latest games on high settings and lag free. The rest of my new machine will be: 8800 Ultra, 2x2 GB of Corsair XMS DDR2 800 and a Velociraptor HDD. My question is, which processor? I won't be over-clocking nor water-cooling which is why I am looking at stock speeds and not over-clockability.

These are the two processors I am looking at, depending on which one will suite my needs:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103249
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103773
 
Are you going to buy the 8800Ultra or do you have it already? I would recommend the HD 4850 or HD 4870 for the graphic card instead.

Phenom is about 10% faster clock for clock than the Athlon X2 so if you buy the 2.5GHz Phenom, it would perform like a ~2.75GHz Athlon X2 in an application that doesn't benefit from multi core CPU but in an application that does benefit from multi core GPU, it should be a lot faster than the 3.0GHz Athlon X2.

I think that quad core is a better choice because newer applications will benefit more from multi core in the future and in applications that don't benefit from multi core, the Phenom is actually already fast enough. Now it is up to you whether it is worth it to get the quad core.

Btw, the quad core above is an unlocked CPU so it can be overclocked quite easily if later you want to try it.
 
I'd go with the x2 6400, or Phenom 9950. You don't really need a BE processor if you are not overclocking.

Most games don't scale past dual, so unless you are big into SupCom, go with the x2 6400. Personally, If I were buying an AMD rig today, I"m getting a 9950/DFI 790FX. Actually, I wouldn't be getting it today because I'd be waiting for SB750 equipped mainboards. :)
 
No, I don't have the 8800 Ultra yet. I've just always been an Nvidia fanboy and the 3850 I have now is my first ATI vid card.

What are some applications that do benefit from multicore CPUs?
 
Khaos Kid said:
No, I don't have the 8800 Ultra yet. I've just always been an Nvidia fanboy and the 3850 I have now is my first ATI vid card.

What are some applications that do benefit from multicore CPUs?
Click to expand...

Seems like there is a thread posted with questions on this daily.

- Video rendering/encoding
- Photoshop
- CAD apps
- General multitasking
- Software development/compiling
 
dook43 said:
Seems like there is a thread posted with questions on this daily.
Click to expand...

The people want to know! :p

dook43 said:
- Video rendering/encoding
- Photoshop
- CAD apps
- General multitasking
- Software development/compiling
Click to expand...

And, I don't do any of that, save maybe general multitasking, which is to say, I probably don't need a quad core.

Thanks for the info guys.
 
Since you aren't ocing, I'd go with the 6400 and drop the extra 30 bones. Otherwise, I'd recommend the 6000 or even the 5000 BE. :)
 
In all honesty man, I would get the quad, there is no advantage to having a dual core in gaming. Going between my Quad and dual core both clocked at the same speed I see no difference in my frame rate, neither positive nor negative. And the encoding benefits of the extra two cores are better if you work with photoshop or encode a lot of HD movies.
 
Judging by your old system, you're not someone that upgrades often. In that case, get the quad. I think you'd be regretting it in a year or two if you don't.
 
darkpaw said:
Judging by your old system, you're not someone that upgrades often. In that case, get the quad. I think you'd be regretting it in a year or two if you don't.
Click to expand...

my exact train of thought too. Go with the quad.

Also, you want a 9800GTX+ or an HD4850. Both those cards with thump an 8800 Ultra at a significant saving.
 
To dark and wizard, yes, I have had that same thought. Since I don't build new rigs often I might as well get the latest and greatest (especially since cost isn't too big of a deal). You're right in that a year or 2 from now, the quad will be better than the dual. I have a bad habit of building my rigs a step behind. And I have also been comparing vid cards on newegg and people really like the 4850/4870s over the 8800s. I'll admit, I am very pleased with my current 3850. Maybe I will use ATI from now on, especially since all I have ever used are AMD processors and the two companies are one now.
 
Ok, so I decided I'll build a quad core rig. Since all my wish list items were for a dual core set-up, what would you guys recommend for a quad set-up? What I need: processor, mobo, RAM and CPU heatsink/fan.
 
Is the Zalman 9700 good for quad cores? I actually already have one that I bought a couple of weeks ago in anticipation of a dual core system. Are they good for quad core processors? 'Cuz if so, I'll keep the one I already have and not deal with the hassle of RMA'ing it.
 
Khaos Kid said:
Is the Zalman 9700 good for quad cores? I actually already have one that I bought a couple of weeks ago in anticipation of a dual core system. Are they good for quad core processors? 'Cuz if so, I'll keep the one I already have and not deal with the hassle of RMA'ing it.
Click to expand...

if you RMA it they'll just send you a new one. Under the goods and services act an RMA is only supposed to occur if the product is defective.

But you dont need to, since the CNPS 9700 is one of the better after market coolers available anyways. Its fine for your quad.
 
debello_64 said:
If you are dead set on AMD then wait a few weeks for the new 790FX mobo with the SB750 chips.
Click to expand...

What's the projected release date on that mobo? I just ordered an AMD Phenom 9950, Sapphire Radeon HD 4870, 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066 and a WD Velociraptor HDD and all I need now is a mobo to bring all that together. WOOT for free shipping on all 4 items!
 
I would go with the Athlon 64 X2. It costs over 100 less than the quad and you won't notice much of a difference with todays games. Get a 4850 video card with it and a AMD 790 chipset motherboard. At a later date, when you actually need quad, then you could upgrade the CPU to a quad core for dirt cheap.

I would like to add if you can afford the 100+ for a quad core, then I would put that money into an additional 4850 and run CF instead. You will see more benefit when playing games. As you can see from my sig, that is something similar to what I did but I'm using Intel and NVIDIA. You will have pretty much the same performance as my PC but at half the price of what I paid for it a couple of months ago.
 
Khaos Kid said:
What's the projected release date on that mobo? I just ordered an AMD Phenom 9950, Sapphire Radeon HD 4870, 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066 and a WD Velociraptor HDD and all I need now is a mobo to bring all that together. WOOT for free shipping on all 4 items!
Click to expand...

Sounds like a pretty slick rig!

My rig with the 4850 can play Crysis on mostly high settings on 1680x1050 resolution. I love it!
 
ZMTToxics said:
Sounds like a pretty slick rig!

My rig with the 4850 can play Crysis on mostly high settings on 1680x1050 resolution. I love it!
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can't wait to get it built. I'll need to buy a lot of games too, like Crysis and Bioshock, lol. :eek:
 
Khaos Kid said:
No, I don't have the 8800 Ultra yet. I've just always been an Nvidia fanboy and the 3850 I have now is my first ATI vid card.
Click to expand...

There are some 9800 GTX's are around $200 at the NewEgg, that would be a better choice than the 8800 Ultra I think. The 8800 series is outdated for the most part. It is two generations older than the current hot stuff, the GTX260/280
 
dook43 said:
Seems like there is a thread posted with questions on this daily.

- Video rendering/encoding
- Photoshop
- CAD apps
- General multitasking
- Software development/compiling
Click to expand...

A quad is also useful if you are running virtualization software such as VMware or Virtual PC, you can dedicate one, two or three of your cores specifically to a VM/VMs, still leaving one core for running your desktop. I guess that may fall partially under Software development, but I have seen some sales presentations where guys were running multiple VMs to demonstrate a product, a quad would be really helpful in that circumstance.
 
Khaos Kid said:
What's the projected release date on that mobo? I just ordered an AMD Phenom 9950, Sapphire Radeon HD 4870, 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066 and a WD Velociraptor HDD and all I need now is a mobo to bring all that together. WOOT for free shipping on all 4 items!
Click to expand...

AMD Fanboy!!

;-)

jk nice system!
 
Khaos Kid said:
What's the projected release date on that mobo? I just ordered an AMD Phenom 9950, Sapphire Radeon HD 4870, 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066 and a WD Velociraptor HDD and all I need now is a mobo to bring all that together. WOOT for free shipping on all 4 items!
Click to expand...

that might be a while, the 780/790GX is due out with it though. but might be longer then you want to wait http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1287615

around the first part of August. maybe.

and a foxcom preview
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=6&id=2618

this is what I am waiting for
 
brons2 said:
A quad is also useful if you are running virtualization software such as VMware or Virtual PC, you can dedicate one, two or three of your cores specifically to a VM/VMs, still leaving one core for running your desktop. I guess that may fall partially under Software development, but I have seen some sales presentations where guys were running multiple VMs to demonstrate a product, a quad would be really helpful in that circumstance.
Click to expand...

One of the reasons why I bought an E6400 instead of an E4300 is because of VT technology. I find my virtual environments to be much speedier than when it isn't enabled. 4GB of RAM helps too.
 
dook43 said:
One of the reasons why I bought an E6400 instead of an E4300 is because of VT technology. I find my virtual environments to be much speedier than when it isn't enabled. 4GB of RAM helps too.
Click to expand...

Alot of vmware software (xen? linux "KVM", vmware w/ 32 bit OS & 64-bit guests) don't run at all without hardware virtualization extensions. This is where amd has intel cremed on the lowend (sub $100)
 
Robstar said:
Alot of vmware software (xen? linux "KVM", vmware w/ 32 bit OS & 64-bit guests) don't run at all without hardware virtualization extensions. This is where amd has intel cremed on the lowend (sub $100)
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I don't think a lot of folks in the enterprise are doing virtualization on the cheap. I utilize it pretty heavily at home but I am the exception rather than the rule.

For me, it was between a brisbane 3600+ and my sig rig back in 4/07. As a sometime consultant and developer, virtualization was a must to me so the E4XXX series was out.

I was able to pick up my board, processor, and RAM (board and ram used from here, and bnib processor from here) around $100 under retail and around $10 more than new parts for the 3600+. There simply wasn't a used market for brisbane stuff at that time so I went Intel. Supposedly you need to get 400 MHZ over the equivalent intel mhz to have equal performance, and with the clocking results that people were getting out of their E6400s I thought it would be nigh impossible to reach 3.6 on the brisbanes. Even though I failed at 3.2 on my allendale I still feel like 2.8 (400mhz bus) would outperform all Athlon X2 chips at stock speed.

I don't think I'll be buying new stuff again, I had so much good luck with trading on here. Again, that's where Intel wins because you simply won't have much luck finding a lot of high speed used AMD parts. So, if you ain't skeered of trading online, a lot of times you can get pretty close when comparing used-but-good Intel prices to new AMD prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top