Quad Core or Dual Core for mid-range gaming.

Since you're only gaming you don't need a quad, the E8400 or E8500 will be enough for you.f-a-d-3

thats right. I dont see why everyone is buying a quad core when there are almost no games that use more than dual

who cares its cheap and more powerful than dual core so get it .ROCKINGFOOL

But whats the point in having a cpu that is going to have a lower clock speed for his games when he wants it for gaming, a Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.0ghz would be a much better idea as games will utilise this more as its got a higher clock speed on it. Why pay that bit more for say a 2.4ghz quad core when your only going to see the difference in your programs?

Ive been through same dilemma as im replacing my entire rig this month but I mostly want it for gaming too and personally id rather have a higher clock speed than more cores that wont be used much, ok so the quad will come into its own a few years down the line but for now its a waste.

[QUOTE="ROCKINGFOOL"]who cares its cheap and more powerful than dual core so get it .KurganUK23

But whats the point in having a cpu that is going to have a lower clock speed for his games when he wants it for gaming, a Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.0ghz would be a much better idea as games will utilise this more as its got a higher clock speed on it. Why pay that bit more for say a 2.4ghz quad core when your only going to see the difference in your programs?

Ive been through same dilemma as im replacing my entire rig this month but I mostly want it for gaming too and personally id rather have a higher clock speed than more cores that wont be used much, ok so the quad will come into its own a few years down the line but for now its a waste.

as i said before you can oc Q6600 from 2.4 to 3.4ghz easily and it will beat the crap out of E8400 !!

[QUOTE="KurganUK23"]

[QUOTE="ROCKINGFOOL"]who cares its cheap and more powerful than dual core so get it .ROCKINGFOOL

But whats the point in having a cpu that is going to have a lower clock speed for his games when he wants it for gaming, a Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.0ghz would be a much better idea as games will utilise this more as its got a higher clock speed on it. Why pay that bit more for say a 2.4ghz quad core when your only going to see the difference in your programs?

Ive been through same dilemma as im replacing my entire rig this month but I mostly want it for gaming too and personally id rather have a higher clock speed than more cores that wont be used much, ok so the quad will come into its own a few years down the line but for now its a waste.

as i said before you can oc Q6600 from 2.4 to 3.4ghz easily and it will beat the crap out of E8400 !!

And you can overclock an E8400 from 3.0 Ghz to 4.0 Ghz. It works both ways. And guess what? The Core 2 Duo will be better for gaming. Then when Quads finally come onto the gaming scene full force, he'll be able to get a more powerful quad then what is out now, for the same price they are now.

If you don't plan on overclocking and will be mostly gaming, a quad core wouldn't make much sense. I went from an E8400 to a Q9400 and in any of the latest games there is basically no difference in performance.

Go for a higher clocked dual core.

[QUOTE="ROCKINGFOOL"]who cares its cheap and more powerful than dual core so get it .KurganUK23

But whats the point in having a cpu that is going to have a lower clock speed for his games when he wants it for gaming, a Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.0ghz would be a much better idea as games will utilise this more as its got a higher clock speed on it. Why pay that bit more for say a 2.4ghz quad core when your only going to see the difference in your programs?

Ive been through same dilemma as im replacing my entire rig this month but I mostly want it for gaming too and personally id rather have a higher clock speed than more cores that wont be used much, ok so the quad will come into its own a few years down the line but for now its a waste.

It's all about future proofing your system.

[QUOTE="ROCKINGFOOL"][QUOTE="KurganUK23"]

[QUOTE="ROCKINGFOOL"]who cares its cheap and more powerful than dual core so get it .howlrunner13

But whats the point in having a cpu that is going to have a lower clock speed for his games when he wants it for gaming, a Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.0ghz would be a much better idea as games will utilise this more as its got a higher clock speed on it. Why pay that bit more for say a 2.4ghz quad core when your only going to see the difference in your programs?

Ive been through same dilemma as im replacing my entire rig this month but I mostly want it for gaming too and personally id rather have a higher clock speed than more cores that wont be used much, ok so the quad will come into its own a few years down the line but for now its a waste.

as i said before you can oc Q6600 from 2.4 to 3.4ghz easily and it will beat the crap out of E8400 !!

And you can overclock an E8400 from 3.0 Ghz to 4.0 Ghz. It works both ways. And guess what? The Core 2 Duo will be better for gaming. Then when Quads finally come onto the gaming scene full force, he'll be able to get a more powerful quad then what is out now, for the same price they are now.

even if you raise it to 4ghz it will not be better or should i say faster .

Yes, it will, but it also may bottleneck your other components at a slower clock speed. It's generally up to how much you want to spend, really... I mean, you *could* go for a QX9770, but if you're like us mere mortals with shallower pockets, you may want to choose something that will still hit the speeds you like, without breaking the bank. Q6600 G0 = £114 roughly, E8200 = £80 roughly, Q9550 = £215 roughly (sorry I'm using GBP, but it's generally £1 = $1.80 at the moment so you can probably figure it out) so it's generally whether you want to shell out for a faster quad core, or go for a faster dual core that's cheaper...

Just get a QX9770. Then befriend me, so I can tell everyone I know someone that owns a QX9770. :D

QUICK EDIT: The "Yes, it will" is referring to the message above the post immediately above this post - the one about the Q9400 running Crysis.

you can get Q6600 GO for only 188$ and oc it 3.4ghz easily :)ROCKINGFOOL

yet for gaming it can only just keep up with the e8200 let along the e8500/e8600

who cares its cheap and more powerful than dual core so get it .ROCKINGFOOL

why buy a q6600 over a e8600 when the quad can only beat the dual in video editing and a select few other programs?

photoshop, word to pdf, itunes and basicly and program that isn't video editong runs better on a faster dual over a slower quad.

[QUOTE="KurganUK23"]

[QUOTE="ROCKINGFOOL"]who cares its cheap and more powerful than dual core so get it .ROCKINGFOOL

But whats the point in having a cpu that is going to have a lower clock speed for his games when he wants it for gaming, a Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.0ghz would be a much better idea as games will utilise this more as its got a higher clock speed on it. Why pay that bit more for say a 2.4ghz quad core when your only going to see the difference in your programs?

Ive been through same dilemma as im replacing my entire rig this month but I mostly want it for gaming too and personally id rather have a higher clock speed than more cores that wont be used much, ok so the quad will come into its own a few years down the line but for now its a waste.

as i said before you can oc Q6600 from 2.4 to 3.4ghz easily and it will beat the crap out of E8400 !!

and you can overclock a e8400 to 4ghz easy then it still wins, compare 2.4 to 3ghz in gaming and the e8400 is much more advanced than the q6600 for one 1333mzh >>>>>1066mhz fsb

But a quad will still run Crysis well enough won't it? My dad's ordered a computer and it has a Q9400 in it.Cactus_Matt

sure it will run it but the e8xx will destory it in any game, photoshop and basicly any non video editing program

Nothing is future proof... A same clocked dual core will be faster for games.. And by the time games are utilizing quads, your future proofed quad will be outdated and you'll want to upgrade again.

Okay, I don't do a whole lot of video editing and encoding, but I do encode video sometimes for DVDs. I also game occasionally. I'm building a new rig, do I go for the E8600 (175) or the Q9550 (215)? 30 pounds between them, it's pretty tough. Of course, I'll dabble in some overclocking on a Foxconn BLACKOPS or an ASUS Rampage Extreme...skapunkclarence

I'd stick with the E8600 personally and save a bit of cash, as some have already mentioned by the time Quad's are fully utilised the current ones will be outdated and the cheap end of the barrell, and with new Intels just around the corner (1 even this year i believe the I7, and the westermere I believe due end of next year) its a waste to spend the extra on something your not going to utilise properly, besides the E8600 will probably OC higher than the Q9550 as it has a higher clock speed to begin with.

Although personally I would stick with the E8400 and OC the hell out of it as most say you will easily reach 4ghz in fact im sure ive read someone getting 4.6ghz out of it although I wouldnt like there temps much and I reckon there cooling cost there soul.

Im not sure where you buy your parts from but where I go (cclcomputers) the E8400 is £105 and the E8600 is £200 and for 333mhz extra to start with it dont seem worth it to me as they have the same cache and the same fsb.

But in my opinion the Dual core would be a better option and save you some serious cash, why pay more for something that sounds good but only works better in certain things?

Anyway good luck with whatever you decide, could you tell me where you buy from please? im looking around to see if anywhere is cheaper than ccl but as yet have not found anywhere in the UK.

You make an incredibly good point. Since replacing the E8600 (185 pounds) with the E8400 (111 pounds), I've actually reduced a DDR3 rig using a Foxconn BLACKOPS and 4GB of 1600MHz RAM to 870 pounds! :o For the record, I buy most of my PC stuff from either ebuyer (ebuyer.com) or OcUK (overclockers.co.uk). This is what the rig is looking like now:

Foxconn BLACKOPS
2x2GB Corsair 1600MHz (PC3-12800) RAM (9-9-9-24)
Antec TruePower 850w PSU
Antec P182 case
Sapphire HD4870 TOXIC
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400

All of that comes to about 870 pounds roughly. I've had a look on cclcomputers - I can't find the RAM, but I can just about find everything else. It's hard to navigate that site very well...

You make an incredibly good point. Since replacing the E8600 (185 pounds) with the E8400 (111 pounds), I've actually reduced a DDR3 rig using a Foxconn BLACKOPS and 4GB of 1600MHz RAM to 870 pounds! :o For the record, I buy most of my PC stuff from either ebuyer (ebuyer.com) or OcUK (overclockers.co.uk). This is what the rig is looking like now:

Foxconn BLACKOPS
2x2GB Corsair 1600MHz (PC3-12800) RAM (9-9-9-24)
Antec TruePower 850w PSU
Antec P182 case
Sapphire HD4870 TOXIC
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400

All of that comes to about 870 pounds roughly. I've had a look on cclcomputers - I can't find the RAM, but I can just about find everything else. It's hard to navigate that site very well...

skapunkclarence

Thank you for the compliment:D but I weigh up price vs performance for everything and it dont seem worth it for the extra, seen as I have a lot of experience with that site ive done some quick searching for you and found the ram you want

Corsair 4GB DDR3 1600mhz (9-9-9-24)