Core 2 Duo vs Quad Core, a Question Of Strength?

Right, after finding the desktop of my dreams (since im not paying for it i cant build my own) the XPS 420; I found a dillema in the customisation. So far I have chosen:

• 512MB ATI® Radeon® 3870 Graphics card,
• Hard Drive 500GB Serial ATA non Raid (7200 Rpm)
• 4096MB 800MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [4x1024]

The choice between the CPU's (that dont add about £600 onto the price tag) are:

• Intel® Processor Q6600 Quad CoreTM (2.40GHz, 1066Mhz FSB, 8MB cache) and a
• XPS 420 E8500 Core 2 Duo Processor (3.16GHz, 6MB, 1333MHz)

The XPS Core 2 duo processor is more expensive, but that never really means it's better. Which would be the better choice for playin the games of today (Company of Heroes, Crysis, Assassin's Creed, Medieval 2, Mass Effect... Y'know the types) and the games of tomorrow..

My easily influenced mind has been told that a quad core is "always more powerful than the core 2 duo" when it comes a gaming Computer, I felt that i needed you guy's opinions.

Thanks for any feedback.

For gaming at the MOMENT, a dual core. For gaming in 1-2 years time, the Quad core. Many games only utilise one or two cores, but we will soon see many new games using 4 cores (such as Alan Wake.)

Also, a quad core would be better for media related work, such as photo editing and video editing.

If I was you, I would get the Quad, simply because I think it will be more future proof.

I will be replacing it with an 8800GT when i buy the desktop, but having the 3870 is a nice card to start with.

So the larger GHz on the Core 2 doesnt come into it?

Thanks

I will be replacing it with an 8800GT when i buy the desktop, but having the 3870 is a nice card to start with.

So the larger GHz on the Core 2 doesnt come into it?

Thanks

Wordsofduality

Yes, the E8500 is very fast, but for future games, quad cores will become the norm; which will mean that 4 cores > 2 cores.

so Q9450 > E8400? i haven't seen any benchmarks of those 2, i know the dualcores are better for gaming at the moment but the question is "Incredibly better or just +2fps difference in games?"PNarSerja

Those two processors are pretty similar at the moment, but in the future we will see the Quad core leap into the lead.

Here is some VERY good benchmarks comparing all the modern processors:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/14756/5

So, although the E8500 can beat the Q6600 at the moment, when the later games come into the fore, the E8500 will not perform as well as the Quad?Wordsofduality

Yep.

But by the time games actually utilize the quad cores, won't there be a much better quad core available?Zoso-8

Prolly...and most likely on a completely different platform, MOBO-wise. Now if the OP is planning to replace the system, once these "future quads" appear, then running an E8500, or E8400 would be fine for now. On the other hand, if he's looking to hold on to this XPS 420 for a couple years, he should invest in a quad now and be done with it.

[QUOTE="Wordsofduality"]

I will be replacing it with an 8800GT when i buy the desktop, but having the 3870 is a nice card to start with.

So the larger GHz on the Core 2 doesnt come into it?

Thanks

Guru_G4M3R

Yes, the E8500 is very fast, but for future games, quad cores will become the norm; which will mean that 4 cores > 2 cores.

coming from the man with a q6600. crysis, the witcher, bioshock, cod4, stalker and 95% of new games all run better on faster duals and by the time quad threaded games are out the q6600 will be old new, just like a 4000+ often beats a pentium d 2.8ghz in new games.

for gaming quads are a waste and the e8500 will destory the q6600. thr q6600 strugle to keep up with even a e8200 in games. but for multitasking/video/rendering then go with the quadimprezawrx500

http://www.cpu3d.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4210&Itemid=16&limit=1

I will be replacing it with an 8800GT when i buy the desktop, but having the 3870 is a nice card to start with.

So the larger GHz on the Core 2 doesnt come into it?

Thanks

Wordsofduality

It make no sence to replace a card with a card just sligthly faster... If you want an upgrade you'll prolly need to wait for the HD4850/GT260, we dont have a clue on how good they are as they arent released yet but they most likly will be a solid bit faster than the 8800gt...

(roumors say HD4850 > 9800GTX )

the quad, all games that are comin out and ALOT that have use quads, also you can oc it ti 3.2 E-Zbumsoil

That said, more multithreaded games (games that can actively employ more than one core) will be coming as the inevitability of multicore CPUs sinks in.

I am torn between this choice too. Chances are I will go for the E8500 or E8400. Im just worried that in like a year quads will be better

The performance of modern games is GPU-limited at high resolutions, not processor-limited (with any decent system.) For this reason, if you're gaming, there's absolutely NO reason not to get a Quad given current processor prices.

Go with the Q6600 and overclock it. You should see near-identical performance in current-generation games, and superior performance over dual-core processors in upcoming titles that take advantage of all 4 cores.

Go with the Q6600 and overclock it. You should see near-identical performance in current-generation games, and superior performance over dual-core processors in upcoming titles that take advantage of all 4 cores.

Velocitas8

[QUOTE="Velocitas8"]

Go with the Q6600 and overclock it. You should see near-identical performance in current-generation games, and superior performance over dual-core processors in upcoming titles that take advantage of all 4 cores.

mastershake575

There are folks out there that are desperate (crazy?) enough to OC their locked down Q6600 rigs. I wouldn't try it, 'cause I never purchase locked down boards...there's no motivation...but other people do...

http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?act=Print&client=choose&f=27&t=58361