Quad or Dual Core?

Hi there, I'm new to the TH forums but a long time fan of the site itself!

I am wondering if a quad or dual core is best for me. This will be my second system I will be building from the ground up.

I'm in the air here, should I get a Dual Core 3.0GHz or a Quad Core 2.4GHz?

I am really nurvous of OCing, and don't want to get extra equip. for cooling.

I'll be doing gaming mostly, along with web design (Photoshop/Dreamweaver/Illustratior along with 7 browsers will be open almost constantly when doing that work).

What do you feel is a better fit?
14 answers Last reply
More about quad dual core
  1. Gaming is heading towards quad core, and many web design applications could easily be multithreaded if they're not already (e.g. if applying a filter to an image could be split into two or four sections and one core used for each), so I'd tend to think that would be a better choice for the future.
  2. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/08/dual_vs_quad/

    OCing the Q6600 to 3.2 Ghz on stock air is child's play. Just get a tube of arctic silver ($6) and the artic silver 2 step cleaner ($4), and you're set.

    Here is a guide that will tell you everything you need to know:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/240001-29-howto-overclock-quads-duals-guide

    Also, if you use arctic silver, run the machine at stock settings for about nine days so it can "set" before you OC.
  3. Yea I figured it would be the better future-proofing choice in that regard, but when the gaming apps and all support the quad-core enviroment I'd figure each core would probably be ~3.5/4GHz and then my quad-core would be redundant.
  4. JJ - Would that type of speed only be assumed for a G0? I've been reading everywhere that basically the G0 is the one to have for any OCing on the Q6600.. if that's the case, is there a way I can tell if my CPU is a G0 without opening it? I have it right now, its not opened but I can see the etched information on the CPU thru the window and the label on the side of the box.
  5. Some applications support quad core now. I've heard of instances of the Q6600 being OCed to 3.7ghz (on a Zalman after-market CPU cooler, of course [$60]). I.E.: A Q6600 would not be redundant; far from it. If you want redundancy out of the box, pick up a dual core!

    This is very general, but B3 generally = 3.0-3.3 ghz, while G0 = 3.3-3.5 (up to 3.7 with insanity settings) depending on your cooler and the particular chip. However, I should emphasize that if you're sticking with stock air, you're not going to be getting much farther than 3.2 regardless of stepping.
  6. Look for the product code on the box (PROD. CODE). It should end with SLACR. If you're says something different than SLACR (I forget what B3 says), you're out of luck as far as stepping goes. However, B3's are still decent OCers. But you can always just RMA that one if you don't like it. If you need a pic to illustrate this, just type SLACR G0 into a search engine, and click on one of the articles that come up.
  7. Perfect! JJ thanks for that I do have the G0 Stepping..

    So, since that is the case, you figure I can use the Stock Cooling Fans that comes with the CPU and perhaps some Thermal Paste for good measure and get 3.0GHz easily enough?
  8. If you havn't yet bought your rig why not wait for the new main stream quads? Fist or second quarter of 08.
  9. deranged said:
    If you havn't yet bought your rig why not wait for the new main stream quads? Fist or second quarter of 08.


    Anybody have more info regarding this?
  10. for gaming get a e6850 or e6750, for video editing the quad is better. i got the dual, as i game and im a happy man
  11. nX07 said:
    Anybody have more info regarding this?


    Middle of January 08 is the launch of the "mainstream" Penryn Quad Core Line.

    Tray Prices are something like:

    $266 for the Q9300 (3 MB x 2 L2 Cache, 2.5 GHz, 333 MHz Bus)
    $316 for the Q9450 (6 MB x 2 L2 Cache, 2.66 GHz, 333 MHz Bus)

    I think the Q9300 is overpriced and should be in the lower 200s myself. It's slightly faster than the Q6600 and has SSE4 support but it also has 2 MB less L2 Cache.

    Retail prices will probably be low $300s for the Q9300 and high 300s-low 400s for the Q9450. Depends on what the mark-up ends up being at launch.
  12. I use the same programs you use... photoshop, fireworks, flash and dreamweaver. I also test in different browsers.. IE (multiple versions), Firefox, netscape, opera and so on...

    I had a AMD X2 3800+ and it ran all my programs just fine. I upgrade to a AMD X2 6000+ and I couldn't tell a difference in those programs. I am able to run games on my rig too with no problems ( test drive unlimited, team fortress 2, CoD4 ) though I would like to upgrade my video card to a 8800GT but I don't think this will help with photoshop.. might be wrong though but I think photoshop uses more cpu then gpu????
  13. cnumartyr: Is that a set in stone launch date, and are those CPUs going to be at that price? If so, I'm just going to hold out until then and pick one of them up. A Q9450 sounds nice, especially considering the Q6600 is $280 at the moment. Does anyone happen to know what the multiplier on that is?

    nx07: Yeah, just get arcticlean (I think thats the name, by arctic silver) to clean the thermal pad off the stock cooler and use arctic silver paste. With that I see 3.0 ghz no problemo, with 3.2 a very real possibility.
  14. jjblanche said:
    cnumartyr: Is that a set in stone launch date, and are those CPUs going to be at that price? If so, I'm just going to hold out until then and pick one of them up. A Q9450 sounds nice, especially considering the Q6600 is $280 at the moment. Does anyone happen to know what the multiplier on that is?

    nx07: Yeah, just get arcticlean (I think thats the name, by arctic silver) to clean the thermal pad off the stock cooler and use arctic silver paste. With that I see 3.0 ghz no problemo, with 3.2 a very real possibility.



    Don't know if it's 100% set in stone, however that was the intended Intel launch and I haven't seen any changes in this so far. I don't see why they wouldn't be able to do it. I'm sure while making QX9650s they are piling up on "low yields" to launch the Q9 series.

    Q9550 = 333x8.5
    Q9450 = 333x8
    Q9300 = 333x7.5
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Quad Dual Core Product