• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

quad or dual

Associate
Joined
12 Dec 2008
Posts
55
hey, i'm helping a mate put together a gaming rig

i'm just wondering, which would be faster running games or general?

a dual core processor at 3ghz

or

a quad-core at 2.6ghz?

ty
 
Associate
Joined
5 Jan 2010
Posts
133
Even the games that do use all available cores don't do so in an efficient manner, I'm sticking to dual-core until tech like bulldozer comes along which will change the map a bit.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2006
Posts
11,306
Location
Derbyshire
hey, i'm helping a mate put together a gaming rig

i'm just wondering, which would be faster running games or general?

a dual core processor at 3ghz

or

a quad-core at 2.6ghz?

ty

Really depends on the cpu in question.
Are we talking about core 2 duo dual cores and quads or are we talking about the newer i3/i5/i7 or are we talking amd? Or a mixture?

In general, if I was putting together a rig for myself to last 2 years before a cpu upgrade, I would be looking at quad cores every time.
There is nothing wrong with dual core, but it just isn't the way forward. Even the new i3/i5 that are dual core simulate 2 more via hyperthreading and they are the budget range.
 
Last edited:
Associate
OP
Joined
12 Dec 2008
Posts
55
Really depends on the cpu in question.
Are we talking about core 2 duo dual cores and quads or are we talking about the newer i3/i5/i7 or are we talking amd? Or a mixture?

In general, if I was putting together a rig for myself to last 2 years before a cpu upgrade, I would be looking at quad cores every time.
There is nothing wrong with dual core, but it just isn't the way forward. Even the new i3/i5 that are dual core simulate 2 more via hyperthreading and they are the budget range.

intel core 2 duos and quads, maybe i3/i5/i7 (wat are the i series ones, can someone explain please? i've left the computing scene for a while you see).

thanks in advance
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2010
Posts
14,591
intel core 2 duos and quads, maybe i3/i5/i7 (wat are the i series ones, can someone explain please? i've left the computing scene for a while you see).
Only go Core2 Duo/Quad if you want to save money and use existing socket 775 MB. If you are building new, definite go i3/i5/i7.

Speed wise i7 920 (£220 Quad)>i5 750(£150 Quad)>i3 530 (£100 Dual) for bother games AND all other general usage.

Sidenote: Core 2 Duo E8000 series is slower than i5 530 (a i3 530 at 3.5GHz is already faster than a E8400 at 4.25GHz).
 
Last edited:
Joined
5 Aug 2006
Posts
11,306
Location
Derbyshire
Only go Core2 Duo/Quad if you want to save money and use existing socket 775 MB. If you are building new, definite go i3/i5/i7.

Speed wise i7 920 (£220 Quad)>i5 750(£150 Quad)>i3 530 (£100 Dual) for bother games AND all other general usage.

Sidenote: Core 2 Duo E8000 series is slower than i5 530 (a i3 530 at 3.5GHz is already faster than a E8400 at 4.25GHz).

Indeed. The i7 920, i5 750 (only i5 quad - The other i5's are just a speeded up i3) and the i3 530 are the intel cpu's to buy now.

For a gaming rig I would be looking for an i5 750 and clock it. The i7 is the fastest but then it costs more. The i3 is good but may have problems this year and next when more multi-thread games come out. I hear GTA4 on pc was ported badly and was pants on a dual core system.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Feb 2010
Posts
17
Location
Middlesbrough
Quad to futureproof. Dual core will perform little under a quad right now, for most games. But more 4 core games are hitting the market and the extra 2 cores will come in handy if the game requires them.

Quad for futureproofing value.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Nov 2008
Posts
412
Location
carnmoney outside Belfast
For gaming the extra core is handy. When Im gaming I sometimes have vent or TS open too so Its nice to have that extra headroom. A few titles are starting to use quads now but the difference between 2.6 and 3 GHz will be minimal with abit of overclocking. Most mid range cards bottleneck around 3GHz depending on resolution.

Go quad if you can afford it
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Dec 2008
Posts
10,370
Location
England
Sidenote: Core 2 Duo E8000 series is slower than i5 530 (a i3 530 at 3.5GHz is already faster than a E8400 at 4.25GHz).

Source? How does it work out with hyperthreading off / in applications which don't use more than two cores?

You can't future proof in computing. Buy a balanced system now and it'll still be balanced in the future, but spending more now with the notion that it'll save you money in the long term is generally a false economy.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2010
Posts
14,591
Source? How does it work out with hyperthreading off / in applications which don't use more than two cores?
Test kits: HD5870, 4GB Corsair 800Mhz DDR2, 4GB Corsair 1,600Mhz DDR3

Crysis (DirectX 10, 64-Bit, High) at 1,680x1,050

Core i3 [email protected] (stock speed)=18-42fps
E8400@3GHz (stock speed)=19-36fps
Core i3 530 [email protected]=26-49fps
E8400 [email protected] =27-48fps

Handbrake H.264 Video Encoding
Core i3 [email protected] (stock speed): 1,546, OC 3.5GHz: 1,823
E8400@3GHz (stock speed): 1,040, OC 4.25GHz: 1,542

Multi-tasking
Core i3 [email protected] (stock speed): 840, OC 3.5GHz: 1,009
E8400@3GHz (stock speed): 772, OC 4.25GHz: 992

Cinebench R10
Core i3 [email protected] (stock speed): 9,321, OC 3.5GHz: 10,645
E8400@3GHz (stock speed): 6,602, OC 4.25GHz: 9,870

WPRIME 32M (seconds) (lower is better)
Core i3 [email protected] (stock speed): 17,363 (17s), OC 3.5GHz: 14,320 (14s)
E8400@3GHz (stock speed): 29,047 (29s), OC 4.25GHz: 19,140 (19s)

GIMP Image Editing
Core i3 [email protected] (stock speed): 1,104, OC 3.5GHz: 1,399
E8400@3GHz (stock speed): 1,037, OC 4.25GHz: 1,558


(source: Custom PC Issue 078 March 2010, p40-41)

So out of all those tests, only in GIMP Image Editing that Core i3 530 [email protected] is a little slower than E8400 [email protected]...but bare in mind that it is 3.5GHz vs 4.25GHz. Also, if OC the Core i3 530 further, it will boost the frame rate of Crysis higher as well.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
9 Dec 2009
Posts
1,129
Location
North-East England
I wish I had an i3 build, although I am a fan of the socket 775 boards :p
But ama wait for thew new CPUs to come out this year to buy a new rig, hoping prices on the i3 and 5 to drop.

But indeed i3s are cheap, easy and great to OC and are totally worth it.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Dec 2008
Posts
10,370
Location
England
I'm not sure those results are conclusive, but thank you for your response. The variations are within expected range for the effects of hyperthreading as far as I can tell. I'll have to see if I can find some benchmarks of the 530 with HT off.
 
Back
Top Bottom