PDA

View Full Version : 2.4ghz quad can be faster then 4ghz duo in games!?


Pages : [1] 2

KasuCode
09-04-07, 05:19 PM
Looks like Quad can really kick ass in games too if the game has proper support.
In the Cave part of the Lost Planet benchmark.

Duo at 2.4 got 50
Duo at 4.0 got 80
Quad at 2.4 got 84
Quad at 4.0 got 129


http://www.hardspell.com/english/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=1355

Blacklash
09-04-07, 05:28 PM
Yep and a Q6600 @ 3.6GHz can be faster than an E6850 @3.85GHz in games not optimized for Quad core:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2quad-q6600_8.html#sect0

I love my Gee Oh, and can't wait to get it under some quality water cooling.

einstein_314
09-04-07, 05:59 PM
I love my Q6600.

KasuCode
09-04-07, 06:07 PM
Me too. Im saving up for some very good cooling.

BrianG
09-04-07, 06:16 PM
Ever time I read something like this, it pi55es me off that more developers can not code for multi-core CPUs more effectively. Ah well. I am pretty future-proof with me Quad.

Bearclaw
09-04-07, 07:17 PM
I am going to wait for the 45nm quad cores. Less heat. There just so damn hot right now for my taste.

crainger
09-04-07, 07:51 PM
I love my Q6600.

As do I.

buffbiff21
09-04-07, 08:41 PM
I am going to wait for the 45nm quad cores. Less heat. There just so damn hot right now for my taste.

Same here. They're going to be very inexpensive as well.

|JuiceZ|
09-04-07, 08:43 PM
This is good news. I'm expecting a certain delivery from UPS tomorrow and a Q6600 cpu will be apart of it and I can't wait :D

Slammin
09-04-07, 09:05 PM
Yes, it was hard to not get a quad.

Bearclaw
09-04-07, 09:16 PM
Yes, it was hard to not get a quad.
Ya, but it's worth it waiting for the 45nm.

shabby
09-04-07, 09:50 PM
The only prob with those 45nm quad cores will be the 1333mhz fsb, you'll need some pricey memory if you want a 50% overclock.

CaptNKILL
09-04-07, 10:10 PM
Ever time I read something like this, it pi55es me off that more developers can not code for multi-core CPUs more effectively.
Same here. Its why I went with a dual for now. None of the games I play seem to benefit from more than 2 cores, while a few that I don't play get massive performance increases.

If Crysis changes that, I'll go for a 45nm.

Bearclaw
09-04-07, 10:18 PM
The only prob with those 45nm quad cores will be the 1333mhz fsb, you'll need some pricey memory if you want a 50% overclock.
I'm not a big overclocker at all so its all good.

Bman212121
09-04-07, 10:31 PM
The only prob with those 45nm quad cores will be the 1333mhz fsb, you'll need some pricey memory if you want a 50% overclock.

Yes but the stock FSB won't matter at all if the multipler is the same. Right now you might be 1066fsb x 9 with a 2.4GHZ effective rate and you can OC 50% to 3.6GHZ. (1600FSB) If you come in stock with 1333 x 9 (3GHZ) you will only need a 25% OC to achieve the same speeds with the new processor. Add to that some extra performance gains and a 45nm will still be faster with the smaller OC. It all depends on what speeds they decide to come out with.

jeffmd
09-05-07, 12:52 AM
I was about to get a fast dual core, but the more I thought about it, more and more games in the future will be utilizing separate threads for AI, and Physics. Also with Quad cores fairly affordable out the door, theres now a good chance that more and more games will support more then 2 threads. Heres hoping.

CaptNKILL
09-05-07, 03:16 AM
Yes but the stock FSB won't matter at all if the multipler is the same.
Thats the main problem though. The CPUs with higher multipliers will be quite a bit more expensive.

I think the "low" end Quad Xeon will be around $200, where as one with a decent 8x multi will be around $450.

Let me find the page where I read this....

EDIT: Here it is:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20070815102710.html

Of course, we still don't know if these will be socket 775. That'd really rain on everyone's parade if they didn't release any 775 45nm chips until next year. :o

wysiwyg
09-05-07, 05:42 AM
Looks like Quad can really kick ass in games too if the game has proper support.
In the Cave part of the Lost Planet benchmark.

Duo at 2.4 got 50
Duo at 4.0 got 80
Quad at 2.4 got 84
Quad at 4.0 got 129


http://www.hardspell.com/english/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=1355


w00t! (nana2) (nana2) (nana2)


good to know :afro:

lightman
09-05-07, 09:58 AM
Of course, we still don't know if these will be socket 775. That'd really rain on everyone's parade if they didn't release any 775 45nm chips until next year. :o

We do know. They're not.

Repeat after me: the E5xxx series is the DP Xeon series, and thus uses 771.

E3xxx is the UP Xeon, and uses 775.

Eliminator
09-05-07, 11:00 AM
and people keep recommending dual core over quad core... :screwy:

mullet
09-05-07, 12:58 PM
I would love a quad core but has the new G0 stepping helped with heat? This is the only reason I haven't upgraded.

nightmare beta
09-05-07, 01:08 PM
The only prob with those 45nm quad cores will be the 1333mhz fsb, you'll need some pricey memory if you want a 50% overclock.
You can unlink the memory speed.

BrianG
09-05-07, 01:24 PM
I would love a quad core but has the new G0 stepping helped with heat? This is the only reason I haven't upgraded.
From what I have seen, quite a bit. Even then, the B3 I have isn't much hotter than the E6600 it replaced. You have a bigger space heater installed in that 8800GTX.

mullet
09-05-07, 01:57 PM
From what I have seen, quite a bit. Even then, the B3 I have isn't much hotter than the E6600 it replaced. You have a bigger space heater installed in that 8800GTX.

Agreed, looks like a quad G0 in the near future.

jcossin
09-05-07, 02:10 PM
I just bought a dual core after seriously considering the quad core. But given the $100 price difference it just didn't seem worth going quad for the games I'm playing today. If the picture changes 6 months from now I'll consider dumping my dual core and getting the latest quad core but for now I'm happy with my price/performance ratio...