• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Dual Core, Quad Core or Hex Core CPUs?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Viper69

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
I'm in the process of determining if I should build a new rig now..or wait for AMDs 6core..or maybe even go with Intel 6core.

I would be using my computer for normal stuff..but of course GAMING. Both FPS (Crysis, that is graphics intensive FPS) and RTS like Supreme Commander type games, StarCraft2 when it comes out, and of course online FPS like Battlefield and such.

What do people think? I'm in no rush at all, and have been out of the computer world for a while in terms of reading about the inherent benefits/drawbacks of certain technologies.

Any advice appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
 
What would you need a 6 core for to beging with? From the looks of your description, you wouldn't need it for anything that a dual or quad core couldn't easilly take care of.
Grab yourself a new top end AM3 system and be done with it. Spend the money you saved on a quality PSU or high end GFX or RAM or something. IF you want to stay with AMD that is. If not, then an i7920 would do the trick nicely and not break the bank. Nearly all the X58 boards are good, but the Gigabyte, ASUS and EVGA offerings tend to be the most popular. P6T-Deluxe, GA-X58-UD3,4,5.
 
Last edited:
+1 to what baditude said. You really don't need a 6-core, so it would be like paying for a car with 6 wheels when 4 would do you just fine.

For gaming and general PC stuff, get a fast Dual core, either i3 or S775 or Dual Core AMD. Since your building new, you will probably want to skip the Dual cores for a little more future proofing. But 6 cores for someone who isn't doing professional work is just overkill, unless you like to stroke your ego. A gamer wants a high end video card, so the newest out are the 5XXX series and the GTX 4XX series. Take what you were going to spend on that Intel 6 core and spend it on the best video card.
 
You really don't need 6 cores for gaming. A dual core at a high overclock will suffice for a long time to come. I am using a 2.8Ghz Celeron with 512KB L2 cache. I would overclock it higher, but it is enough for decent FPS as it is.
 
Thanks guys..I didn't anticipate I would actually buy a hexcore, especially at the prices. I was really meaning when the prices dropped down for the hex core. I also put my money into good upper middle of the pack CPU, and take the rest on video card/PSU/mobo.

At the same clock rate, are there any significant factors regarding Intel vs AMD I should be concerned about..that is things I should pay attention to, aside from power consumption?

I have to say it amazes me how many different video cards there are. I like my ATI, but I have seen great reviews on the nVidias lately. I've owned from both companies.
 
Thanks guys..I didn't anticipate I would actually buy a hexcore, especially at the prices. I was really meaning when the prices dropped down for the hex core. I also put my money into good upper middle of the pack CPU, and take the rest on video card/PSU/mobo.

At the same clock rate, are there any significant factors regarding Intel vs AMD I should be concerned about..that is things I should pay attention to, aside from power consumption?

I have to say it amazes me how many different video cards there are. I like my ATI, but I have seen great reviews on the nVidias lately. I've owned from both companies.
the performance is not at the same clock for clock rate, the approximate scaling is intel at 2.6 GHz and AMD at 3.4 GHz
 
Oh shoot..Right..I knew that, but obviously didn't type that..thanks for pointing out the slip up..I remember the clock rate comparison arguments from the early 2000s. It was never about clock rate..correct. Though some manufacturer's and marketing teams would like to make you think so, especially back then.
 
Oh shoot..Right..I knew that, but obviously didn't type that..thanks for pointing out the slip up..I remember the clock rate comparison arguments from the early 2000s. It was never about clock rate..correct. Though some manufacturer's and marketing teams would like to make you think so, especially back then.

Especialy Intel with the p4 sucked balls compared to the AMD it was definitely marketing.
 
Especialy Intel with the p4 sucked balls compared to the AMD it was definitely marketing.


I remember, it was all Intel for sure.....Are they still up to their sleazy marketing? I've read a bit about the latest iCore series' and they seem to get good reviews. I was wondering if this time around I should switch to Intel. I've been with AMD since 2000, never looked back, except recently.
 
I remember, it was all Intel for sure.....Are they still up to their sleazy marketing? I've read a bit about the latest iCore series' and they seem to get good reviews. I was wondering if this time around I should switch to Intel. I've been with AMD since 2000, never looked back, except recently.
If you like to overclock then I would go to Intel they clock higher and they are more stable under the heat than AMD and the higher end Intel series do out perform, however you do pay the price.
 
Those days where AMD was cheaper and better performance at same clock speed are gone. Now AMD is still cheaper, but Intel is ahead on architecture efficiency and also clocks better.

For gaming, with a Phenom II X4 OC'd to ~4 ghz you'd still get enough performance to max any game without causing a sub-60 fps bottleneck to a good GPU. They're roughly equivalent to an Intel Q9xxx @ 4 ghz. There's one exception which is Metro 2033 and that's a ridiculously GPU-demanding game, no matter what CPU you have, you will need 2x GTX480's in SLI to almost max it out and get near 60 fps at resolutions above 1680x1050.

But for video encoding and other tasks that use more than 4 threads, you'll get way more performance out of i7 and any future architecture that increases # of threads.
 
Those days where AMD was cheaper and better performance at same clock speed are gone. Now AMD is still cheaper, but Intel is ahead on architecture efficiency and also clocks better.

For gaming, with a Phenom II X4 OC'd to ~4 ghz you'd still get enough performance to max any game without causing a sub-60 fps bottleneck to a good GPU. They're roughly equivalent to an Intel Q9xxx @ 4 ghz. There's one exception which is Metro 2033 and that's a ridiculously GPU-demanding game, no matter what CPU you have, you will need 2x GTX480's in SLI to almost max it out and get near 60 fps at resolutions above 1680x1050.

But for video encoding and other tasks that use more than 4 threads, you'll get way more performance out of i7 and any future architecture that increases # of threads.


While I know a bit about OC'ing..I rarel do it actually.

If I don't OC at all, which would you guys go with, sounds like Intel of some sort.

As for video..well I should post this in the vid section...but I have been debating as to whether getting 2 vid cards is worth it or not for gaming. And if I get it..is SLI really worth it or is AMD's Crossfire Solution better.

It used to be so simple..Now the choices are so varied/complex haha.
 
If you have the cash for the Core i7 6 core, I would definitely splurge on that. 32nm, **** yeah. :D
 
If you like upgrade-ability without having to get a new motherboard each time a new cpu comes out AMD is the way to go. You can build a top end AM3 system for a relatively small amount of money and pair it with a phenomII x2, x3, or x4 (i have the x4 965) and when you want to you can upgrade to the 6 core phenom chips without having to get a new motherboard or having to worry if your board will support the new socket type. Not to mention that the right amd build can handle any of the games you mentioned without any issue. And like an above poster mentioned, you can use the money saved to pick up a high end graphics card like a 5970 or a gtx 480 depending on your ati/nvidia preference
 
If you like upgrade-ability without having to get a new motherboard each time a new cpu comes out AMD is the way to go. You can build a top end AM3 system for a relatively small amount of money and pair it with a phenomII x2, x3, or x4 (i have the x4 965) and when you want to you can upgrade to the 6 core phenom chips without having to get a new motherboard or having to worry if your board will support the new socket type. Not to mention that the right amd build can handle any of the games you mentioned without any issue. And like an above poster mentioned, you can use the money saved to pick up a high end graphics card like a 5970 or a gtx 480 depending on your ati/nvidia preference

Thanks..I had forgotten about the upgrade issue. So, the AMD roadmap on immediate future chips is owner's won't need a new mobo for a hex core, if they have a quad core..I didn't know that. I didn't know AMD was planning to use the same socket..Hmm it has been a while since I built haha.
 
The only thing im unsure of is if amd will be using the AM3 socket for the new Bulldozer line chips coming out much later (i think in 2011)
 
Back