Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New system: Dual or Quad plus future CPU questions

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Quad Core
  • Dual Core
Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 8, 2007 11:55:00 PM

Hi,
I am putting together a new sytem which will be largely for music production. The main apps I use can make use of as many cores as you throw at them so I belive Quad core would have a large performance advantage over dual core.

My dilema is whether to buy a cheaper Dual core and wait for Quad core prices to fall in a year or so or alternatively jump straight in and blow absurd sums on a Quad core.

If I were to opt for a dual core, would I be able to get a motherboard which is ´future proof´(to some extent!). My experience in the past is that by the time I decide I need more grunt, I end up having to replace CPU, MB, RAM and all as everything has advanced so much. If I buy one of the new intel Bearlake chipset boards such as the Gigabyte DS3 (when it comes out) along with 800MHz DDR2, will I be likely to be able to install the next generation of CPUs when they come out? Or will I yet again have to replace the whole lot? For that matter, what is the road map with intel CPUS, FSB speeds etc etc. I am a bit lost!

Thanks for your help and advice!
Dan

More about : system dual quad future cpu questions

May 9, 2007 12:11:18 AM

I have the exact same problem, except that my system would be for Maya/Fusion/After Effects which also use quad core quite nicely.

I think I'll go C2D E6700 for 290€
and not take the C2Q E6600 for 500€
I save 200€ and can easily switch to a Quad early next year for something like 300€

I'd take a P35 Board from Asus like the
Asus P5K Deluxe/WiFi-AP
€ 219,-
It seems to be out just now!
http://www.alternate.de/html/productDetails.html?baseId...

The P35 chipset supports the upcoming Penryn Dual and Quad Core CPUs.
I think it's better to wait for Quad until Penryn is affordable.
May 9, 2007 11:10:55 PM

Yes, I was leaning towards saving $300 and waiting for Quad cores to come down to a sensible price.. however it is a tricky one. If, for example I have to wait for a year for a quad core to cost $300 (a complete wild guess) then at that point my old C2D will be worthless so I will have forked out a total of $200 for the C2D then $300 for the Quad. Where as if I spend $500 now on a quad I will have the use of it for an extra year for the same overall cost.

Wht will be the advantages of the 45nm Quad cores over the current ones.. this could be a deciding factor on whether I wait or not.

I guess if I go for a C2D knowing that it will be replaced next year I would be better off saving some cash and getting an e6600 or even an e6420 rather than the e6700.
Related resources
May 9, 2007 11:29:15 PM

Quad Cores are WORTHLESS.

They give u 5% better performance in games and since they can overclock far less u lose 20% performance if u overclock with a good cooler.
May 10, 2007 12:11:28 AM

You may have missed the point... this system will not be for games. Audio apps such as Cubase can utilise all four cores and so a very large performance increase would result.

Furthermore, anything more than a light overclock is undesireable as more heat equals more fans at higher speeds equals more noise equals very bad for music production. (I am already planning on using the biggest heatsinks and quitest fan and PSU components I can get my hands on)
May 10, 2007 11:53:31 PM

Yes I have looked into water cooling but it is pretty expensive and I reckon with a well designed air cooled system you can go pretty quiet anyway. Noise damping is an option but a decent case like the Antec p150 has heavy steel walls which deadens a lot of the sound anyway.. besides even with damping there always have to be holes in the case from where the sound can escape.. the best focus is on using large slow quiet fans and large heatsinks and running the system cool and using as little power as possible so as to require less fanning... something which flies in the face of overclocking unfortunately.
!