core 2 or quad core?

s14sliden · Post by **s14sliden** » Sun Nov 18, 2007 4:49 pm

which is better for gameing core to duo or the quad cores? thanks

Zertz · Post by **Zertz** » Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:41 pm

Most current games can't take advantage of having 4 cores available. For gaming, I'd just pick up a C2D; it will overclock higher and run cooler.

w00fd06 · Post by **w00fd06** » Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:51 pm

You may want to consider waiting for AMD's tri-core phenoms, considering most next-gen games were built for multi-threading.

Zelig · Post by **Zelig** » Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:00 pm

For the same price, for most games, a Duo will be better.

In a couple years, the quad will be better than the duo if you bought either at the present.

DaIceMan · Post by **DaIceMan** » Sun Nov 18, 2007 9:12 pm

Quad Core... and then fold for 38296. ;)

stopthekilling77 · Post by **stopthekilling77** » Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:23 pm

DaIceMan wrote:Quad Core... and then fold for 38296. ;)

sir, your logic is impeccable!

Post by **Apoptosis** » Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:48 am

Razorbacx · Post by **Razorbacx** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 8:33 pm

In response to Apop's graphic, has AMD fallen so far that they can't even compete with the lower end of the Core 2 Duo proc's? If I was to build a new computer and went with the C2D proc, what processor would be my best bang for the buck?

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:09 pm

Razorbacx wrote:In response to Apop's graphic, has AMD fallen so far that they can't even compete with the lower end of the Core 2 Duo proc's? If I was to build a new computer and went with the C2D proc, what processor would be my best bang for the buck?

E6750 if your buying in '07
The new 45nm chips from Intel are out very soon. The will run cooler and give an overall better bang for buck.

FeRaL · Post by **FeRaL** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:59 pm

Decisions decisions... After seeing that graph I would almost say the E6750. Though I have seen some others that tell a different story. I will have to find my links though and post them up.

Schwarz · Post by **Schwarz** » Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:25 am

I`ve searched for a while to see benchmarks between a Q6600 and a E6850 and it seems that the Q6600 is on par with the e6850 and sometimes even beats it.
Getting a Q6600 would future proof you too.
I think Lost Planet takes advantage of the 4 cores, so im thinking if one game does it then some should follow soon.
I`d get the Q6600

Schwarz · Post by **Schwarz** » Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:26 am

Linky
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... q6600.html

martini161 · Post by **martini161** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 8:11 am

get a q6600, some decent cooling, and over clock it. if you do that youll be set for a while in terms of processor

Gamble · Post by **Gamble** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:24 pm

Seems like the Q6600 is pretty popular these days... grab a nice cooler (think 120mm cooling fan on it like Tt or Scythe) and overclock it till your temps are below-volatile but higher-than-normal. You will be pleased for a couple years....

Legit Reviews

core 2 or quad core?

core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?

Re: core 2 or quad core?