PDA

View Full Version : Buying a new processor: Dual Core or Single?


Pages : [1] 2 3

SilentKayos
11-17-05, 11:02 AM
So yeah, I'm buying a new processor for Christmas. I have 400 bucks to spend.

Basically I've been researching both single and dual core AMD 64 bit processors.

Currently I have a AMD Athlon64 3500+ which for some reason, it runs games worse than my old 2800+ (754 socket). (Think it could be a RAM issue?)

Anyway, I've been looking at the AMD Athlon 64 4000+ which is just a little over 300 bucks. I've also been looking at the AMD Athlon 64 4200 X2 which I can get for pretty much 400 on the nose.

From what I've been reading, the 4200 X2 runs just as fast as my current processor but with two cores. What that means is that it takes advantage of multiprocessor applications such Photoshop and AutoCad. I use Photoshop to some degree, not hardcore like I used to. It's also good for ripping DVDs and such. Video stuff is something I do as a hobby, it's not like my current processor sucks at it. Another thing with this is that games will eventually be taking advantage of dual core processors to optimize games, but for right now, there is no game on the market that is even able to use multicored processors for the PC.

Now, if I went with the 4000+ single core I wouldn't get that extra core.

Right now I'm just undecided on what would be a better choice for me in the long run. I don't want to basically upgrade my system to the same processor with just another core, but at the same time dual core games will be used in the future.

Gah.

Gorion
11-17-05, 11:27 AM
Nvidia drivers are taking advantage of dual core procs. I would say go dual.

SilentKayos
11-17-05, 11:47 AM
Nvidia drivers are taking advantage of dual core procs. I would say go dual.

How are they taking advantage of dual core?

Daneel Olivaw
11-17-05, 12:04 PM
SS2 and a few other games a SMP aware. They use dual core. Quake4 too.

Gorion
11-17-05, 12:05 PM
How are they taking advantage of dual core?

Release Highlights:

Adds support for GeForce 7800 GTX 512 and GeForce 6800 GS
Improved performance for Quake 4
Improved performance and compatibility for Call of Duty 2
Mixed vendor support for NVIDIA SLI.
TV-Out/HD-out support for NVIDIA SLI.
Added support for VSync on Direct3D games when running NVIDIA SLI.
Performance enhancements for dual-core CPUs.
PureVideo high definition MPEG-2 de-interlacing support.
Usability enhancements when connecting to an HDTV.
Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0c and OpenGL® 2.0 support
For a full list of fixed and known issues please view the Release Notes.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_81.94.html

From their release notes. I'm short on details, but I'm sure if you want to read the pdf you could find out.

Riptide
11-17-05, 12:06 PM
I'd go with the 4200+. See sig. :D

SilentKayos
11-17-05, 12:19 PM
So, Serious Sam 2 and Quake 4 is the only game that takes advantage of dual core?

What's good about the 4000+? It does have a 1MB L2 Cache, what's the advantage of that? (4200 has 2 512)

Tr1cK
11-17-05, 12:21 PM
You can't go wrong with the x2 3800+. See sig :D

technoid
11-17-05, 12:31 PM
I'd go with the Athlon 4000+ myself. If you're into programs that use dual cores then go the dual core route but if not stick to a single core processor and avoid the little issues that crop up from time to time gaming on a dual core processor. I know most will disagee with me but they have dual core processors :)

By the time games actually support dual cores you'll be upgrading again and get a dual core processor then. I've seen several reviews and papers on dual core processors and right now they're just not for gaming, it's just the in thing to do :)

Please don't beat on me too hard for liking single core processors :D

BrianG
11-17-05, 01:12 PM
After having the dual core for a while, I will never go back to single core. There is this unbenchable smoothness on a dual core system. It is hard to quantify.

The other great thing is to be able to have resource hogging programs running and no fear of launching a game. Dual core all the way...

superklye
11-17-05, 01:15 PM
After having the dual core for a while, I will never go back to single core. There is this unbenchable smoothness on a dual core system. It is hard to quantify.

The other great thing is to be able to have resource hogging programs running and no fear of launching a game. Dual core all the way...
Yup, that's what I've been hearing. I cannot WAIT to get a dual core processor and having 2-4GB of RAM, I could leave my torrents running and/or burn/rip a DVD and fire up FEAR with absolutely no worry whatsoever of a system slowdown.

As it is now, I can barely browse the web while burning a DVD.

Tr1cK
11-17-05, 01:18 PM
As it is now, I can barely browse the web while burning a DVD.

Hmm. I've never had that problem even back when I used an Athlon XP. That seems weird.

SilentKayos
11-17-05, 01:26 PM
After having the dual core for a while, I will never go back to single core. There is this unbenchable smoothness on a dual core system. It is hard to quantify.

The other great thing is to be able to have resource hogging programs running and no fear of launching a game. Dual core all the way...


That's coming from someone with a 4800+...

The thing I'm worried about is that if I do get a 4200+ X2 is that it won't show a very big improvement in games over my 3500+(I bought this processor like 2 weeks ago).

ALSO I just remembered that I am running an apache server on my computer..so a dual processor is sounding more and more like the choice..

Gorion
11-17-05, 01:32 PM
If you can, consider the 4400+. It never hurts to have the extra cache.

Tr1cK
11-17-05, 01:33 PM
That's coming from someone with a 4800+...

The thing I'm worried about is that if I do get a 4200+ X2 is that it won't show a very big improvement in games over my 3500+(I bought this processor like 2 weeks ago).

I felt a big improvement going from a 3500 to my 3800 @ the same clock speeds. Even games run better. I check my cpu usage in WoW and average 60% across both cores (as shown by task manager). I also seem to get about 10-20% better fps in it as well with the new forceware. I know one spot in the game where I would hit 20fps, I now hit 29fps with higher quality settings. I'll never own another single core as my main PC again.

Riptide
11-17-05, 01:38 PM
That's coming from someone with a 4800+...

The thing I'm worried about is that if I do get a 4200+ X2 is that it won't show a very big improvement in games over my 3500+(I bought this processor like 2 weeks ago).
No, I seriously doubt you'll see much improvement then. The clock speeds and cache sizes are equal between those two. Hell I have serious doubts even the 4400+ would provide much improvement. Cache does not do much for you vs. clock speeds. More clock speed is by far preferable IMO.

The only difference I think you'd see is the ability to do background tasks while gaming and not see any performance loss in the game (for most situations).

Dazz
11-17-05, 01:54 PM
No, I seriously doubt you'll see much improvement then. The clock speeds and cache sizes are equal between those two. Hell I have serious doubts even the 4400+ would provide much improvement. Cache does not do much for you vs. clock speeds. More clock speed is by far preferable IMO.

The only difference I think you'd see is the ability to do background tasks while gaming and not see any performance loss in the game (for most situations).
And thats why Games play better :) i've had a 4400+ since they came out and will never go back to a single core chip more so considering i am at 2.7GHz with little over defualt voltage :)

DRen72
11-17-05, 02:36 PM
I researched this extensively for weeks before buying my 4800+ dual core CPU purchase. Who here doesn't run something in the tray all the time such as anti-virus programs or things like that? I know some of you run Daemon tools or Alcohol to play your backups. Whenever you do, this is running in the background and that is why dual core processors in real word performance will outperform a single core CPU. If you seriously never run anything in the background while you game, then by all means go single core. I chose the 4800+ over the FX-55 thinking in terms of future proofing as well. Its fairly clear to me that developers are going to be tayloring software and games to work with dual core processors going forward instead of ignoring them. I seriously do not expect to have to upgrade my 4800+ for at least two (maybe three) years. I will of course upgrade to faster video cards.

ViN86
11-17-05, 02:57 PM
again depends on what you do.

if you just game and are all about it, get an FX-57 and OC that beast.
if you multitask, any X2 will suffice, as they are very good OC'ers.

or you could wait for the FX-60, a dual core beast (jAkUp posted about it a little while ago, pretty impressive)

SilentKayos
11-17-05, 04:26 PM
again depends on what you do.

if you just game and are all about it, get an FX-57 and OC that beast.
if you multitask, any X2 will suffice, as they are very good OC'ers.

or you could wait for the FX-60, a dual core beast (jAkUp posted about it a little while ago, pretty impressive)


Yeah, that's out of the question.

Zelda_fan
11-17-05, 04:42 PM
That's coming from someone with a 4800+...

The thing I'm worried about is that if I do get a 4200+ X2 is that it won't show a very big improvement in games over my 3500+(I bought this processor like 2 weeks ago).

ALSO I just remembered that I am running an apache server on my computer..so a dual processor is sounding more and more like the choice..

A dual core processor is going to be more "future proof." Almost all future games in developement will take advantage of dual cores which means single cores are going to get blown out of the water fast. Oblivion is taking advantage of dual core as well as the Unreal3 engine.

Dual core = the future.

saturnotaku
11-18-05, 08:03 AM
Oblivion is taking advantage of dual core as well as the Unreal3 engine.

Not so much for Oblivion, but by the time UE3 comes out we'll probably be at Socket M. That's the point where I'll likely upgrade to a dual core S939 as the prices I'm sure will fall dramatically.

Mathesar
11-18-05, 09:04 AM
After having the dual core for a while, I will never go back to single core. There is this unbenchable smoothness on a dual core system. It is hard to quantify.

The other great thing is to be able to have resource hogging programs running and no fear of launching a game. Dual core all the way...

Agreed , I noticed the same things when going dual core and could never go back to single core.

Sazar
11-18-05, 11:39 PM
After having the dual core for a while, I will never go back to single core. There is this unbenchable smoothness on a dual core system. It is hard to quantify.

The other great thing is to be able to have resource hogging programs running and no fear of launching a game. Dual core all the way...

Seconded.

bugmage
11-19-05, 06:55 AM
oh i would like to toss in my .02 but x2s run so cool that you can oc them insainly, my amd 3400 newcastle had a cu zalman on it and would still hit 60C at load