4 Is More Than 2 . . .

Bad Maniac · Dec 5, 2007

http://www.overclockers.com/tips01261

I agree completely with this article. In fact I still question the sanity of dual cores for 99.99% of the home PC users out there. Though with HD content getting more common dual cores are starting to make some sense.

I thought me and my esteemed colleagues here could make a sort of list tho, in regards to this article, what would you actually have to be doing for a quad core to genuinely be worth the price premium over a dually?

From the article, Audio Editing is one.

My addition to the list is Supreme Commander.
When asked about how to improve the game performance, the developers said "Get a quad core" and it really does eat CPU's.

What else?

CGR · Dec 5, 2007

Yea, I agreed with that article as well. Though I can say that a dual core has helped a lot when I want to burn a dvd and do something else at same time.

I cant really justify to myself to get a quad. Just a waste of money for me at the moment. It seems most people buy quads to up their benchmark scores more than anything else.

Kinda a waste of money IMO unless you actually do something that needs a quad.

Heavy photo editing
3D Rendering

On a side note if I had oodles of money laying around I would get a quad or two or three to fold or something. At least it would be doing something beneficial.

petteyg359 · Dec 5, 2007

If it can do twice as much folding, I think it's worth it for that alone. It'd probably be useful for people using them in HTPC systems for video encoding, too.

neonlazer · Dec 5, 2007

petteyg359 said:
If it can do twice as much folding, I think it's worth it for that alone. It'd probably be useful for people using them in HTPC systems for video encoding, too.

I definitely agree with the article..people who dont know anything about computers should not get a quad..let alone people who do know what a computer is but dont know that most programs today do not support 2+ cores. I use many adobe apps..including a video, audio, and special effects(whatever you want to call After Effects lol) which when rendering..my 3.6ghz quad eats it up for breakfast...it was funny to see the difference in after effects rendering between my old dual opteron 165 and this q6600...theres no going back..but the problem i think most have when they hear "4 cores is better than 2" is that most programs dont support quad yet..sooo...yea...some reasons to get a quad

-Mega multitasker(GO THIDERAS!)
-audio,video,autocad rendering..stuff like that
-servers

I do all of these...i multitask very nicely, i use adobe apps that use all 4 cores, and i sometimes host a teamspeak server if my clans goes down..works well..ok ill shut up..im talking too much..

Neuromancer · Dec 5, 2007

I went with a quad because the price differnce was not that great for a "comparable" dual core cpu. the 6850 was only 10 dollars cheaper.

As for me thogh... quad is definitly useful 10% of the time. Most of the time my pc sits and does little. However when I need the power (and since my gaming PC is also my home server and HTPC) its very useful. I can convert DVDs to AVI while playing neverwinternights and not experience one hiccup if I set affinity, plus once I get a tuner I will be converting a lot more video then I do presently.

Quad for me was an investment in the future as I dont expect to upgrade again for at least a year.

eaglescouter · Dec 5, 2007

SETI, and perhaps a bit more SETI

The workunit production on the Q6600 compared to a 3.4Ghz Prescott: Rac of 3,398 for the quad (and still rising), and Rac of 683 for the prescot.

If you look at space consumed, these two rigs would be equal, but production is 497% higher on the quad.

So 5 Prescot 3.4Ghz pc's to equal one Q6600 (GO stepping), thus a significant savings of space, electricity, and heat production.

Yes the Quad does make sense, for users who can take 4 cores to 100% load and keep it there.

Maverick0984 · Dec 5, 2007

We said the same thing when it was Single Core Hyper Threaded vs. Dual Core...

You can try to explain it away as much as you want, but CPU's like the Q6600 mentioned a billion times on this forum, are not in anyway, "more expensive" then a comparative Dual Core.

E6850 vs Q6600 are essentially the same price.

My PC is a File Server/Web Server/Gaming Machine/HTPC all built into one, and I'm an extremely good multitasker at the same time. Does all that stuff require 100% 24/7? Of course not, but when it does, I'm glad I have the 4 cores.

If you want a Dual for other reasons like power consumption and heat, then fine. But it isn't like you have to go out and spend $800 to jump into the Quad realm like some here would have you believe is the case.

CGR · Dec 5, 2007

Maverick0984 said:
We said the same thing when it was Single Core Hyper Threaded vs. Dual Core...

You can try to explain it away as much as you want, but CPU's like the Q6600 mentioned a billion times on this forum, are not in anyway, "more expensive" then a comparative Dual Core.

E6850 vs Q6600 are essentially the same price.

My PC is a File Server/Web Server/Gaming Machine/HTPC all built into one, and I'm an extremely good multitasker at the same time. Does all that stuff require 100% 24/7? Of course not, but when it does, I'm glad I have the 4 cores.

If you want a Dual for other reasons like power consumption and heat, then fine. But it isn't like you have to go out and spend $800 to jump into the Quad realm like some here would have you believe is the case.

The price is usually more than just the chip. For AMD users its the chip, new board, new memory etc etc etc. Hard to justify $500+ just for another two cores that dont get used with much.

ratbuddy · Dec 5, 2007

CGR said:
The price is usually more than just the chip. For AMD users its the chip, new board, new memory etc etc etc. Hard to justify $500+ just for another two cores that dont get used with much.

When I can get a quad with the same clocks as a dual core, at the same price, I'll buy one. Secondary concerns are heat and power consumption, but when it was time to buy a CPU, the E6750 was around $220, and Q6600 around $300 or so, while running slower.. For me, it was an easy decision.

Edit: oops, meant to quote the post above that.

Maverick0984 · Dec 5, 2007

CGR said:
The price is usually more than just the chip. For AMD users its the chip, new board, new memory etc etc etc. Hard to justify $500+ just for another two cores that dont get used with much.

Well, that's if you are upgrading "just" the CPU. Any "real" upgrade or perhaps a new build doesn't have these problems.

ratbuddy said:
When I can get a quad with the same clocks as a dual core, at the same price, I'll buy one. Secondary concerns are heat and power consumption, but when it was time to buy a CPU, the E6750 was around $220, and Q6600 around $300 or so, while running slower.. For me, it was an easy decision.

Edit: oops, meant to quote the post above that.

Why are you on these forums if you are just going to stick with the stock clock ? :santa:

brakezone · Dec 5, 2007

One of the first uses that comes to mind for me would be for compiling code faster on linux, or compile things under linux while playing a game. As another user mentioned, folding at home. Also, it would be neat to learn how to program multithreaded apps to make use of a 4 core system, which is easier to do if you have a test system.

There really truely are not alot of users that would benifit at all from a quad core right now. I think alot of people would want one for the 3dmark06 bonus points; however, I think that this inflates your score more than the actual benifit. For real gaming performance, you'd be better off getting the two core to a higher clock speed.

RAMMAN · Dec 5, 2007

as you can tell from my sig, im a firm believer that architecture>raw clockspeed>number of cores when it comes to gaming.oh and that includes supreme commander as it only uses 2.5 cores.

Neuromancer · Dec 5, 2007

CGR said:
The price is usually more than just the chip. For AMD users its the chip, new board, new memory etc etc etc. Hard to justify $500+ just for another two cores that dont get used with much.

Not for AM2 users

Just if you want the improved feature set of the new motherboards...which is pretty amazing.

ShadowPho · Dec 5, 2007

I program.
3 body problem. Enough said.

I would get a quad core if it is cheap, I 100% need it.

jmsanders2 · Dec 5, 2007

3 reasons in this order:
FEA -------------\
Between this and the more ram I need, cuts down on times huge!
Math Programming/
Games- ever since I got the three extra cores, I've noticed a huge improvement in my fps and my fragging has improved three-fold! On a side note, the size of my **** decreased three fold??? :beer:

Kuroimaho · Dec 6, 2007

I concur with him, that was one of the reason why I switched to Intel very fast duals vs slow quads is simple. FPS is determined by the video thread and highspeed dual just own lowspeed quads with one core at max 3 other just doing some this and that.
Gonna take a while till this is going to change, so I am sitting still on duals till nehalem.

Omsion · Dec 6, 2007

RAMMAN said:
...oh and that includes supreme commander as it only uses 2.5 cores.

AMD Tricore ftw?

Maybe =P

Mr.Guvernment · Dec 6, 2007

GFX work
Audio Work
Video work

will all eat quad cores for breakfast.

DomoRawks · Dec 6, 2007

I bought it for Sup Com and future proofing.

I had a 2140 which just didnt cut it. The cost of upgrading to a fast dual wasnt that different than upgrading to a Q6600, so getting a faster dualy, to then get a fast quad in 18 months didnt sit well.

That being said, I'll sit with my Q6600 for three years, I was using a Northwood till recently

Mr.Guvernment · Dec 6, 2007

i would say that will work for many, going quad core right now is a safe future proof for most everyday users and some just abnove it for a good 3+ years.

considering how many people still own PIII or lw end 2gh p4's

4 Is More Than 2 . . .

Member

Member

Likes Popcorn

Member

Member

Frustrating Senior SETI Nut!

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads