Quad vs Dual Gaming

[kazar123]

Dual Core - Intel® Core2™ Duo 3.0GHz E8400 vs Quad Core - Intel® Core2™ Quad-Core 2.66GHz Q9450

I was just wondering which would be better for gaming.

also should i get:

2 GB 1066MHz CORSAIR PC2-8500 DDR2 SDRAM SLI Ready or 4 GB 800 MHz CORSAIR PC2-6400 DDR2 SDRAM

also for gaming thanks.

 

[frozenlead]

In terms of CPU, the dual with the higher clockspeed will do better for gaming, but the quad is easy to overclock to the same speed. I would pick the quad and overclock it if I were you, just make sure you've got a good cooler on top of it.

For the ram, either will do fine, although the 4GB is better than the 2GB. I'll bet the 2GB is cheaper because it's DDR2 800. Really, 1066 ram offers very little performance boost over 800, but if you're overclocking its a bit of a better choice.

 

[kazar123]

thanks for the advice

 

[sciggy]

On the same note, for overclocking is it better to get higher speed ram so that you can boost the FSB more? Does 1066 help in getting higher speeds than 800?

 

[monst0r]

On the same note, for overclocking is it better to get higher speed ram so that you can boost the FSB more? Does 1066 help in getting higher speeds than 800?

1066MHz ram is just 800MHz ram VERIFIED to work at that speed. You most likely can achieve a similar result with a nice C4 800MHz module..

 

[grieve]

At this moment E8400 will be faster in ALMOST all games... there are a few out there that can actually use quad core.

 

[sciggy]

1066MHz ram is just 800MHz ram VERIFIED to work at that speed. You most likely can achieve a similar result with a nice C4 800MHz module..

So essentially, 1066 is the same as 800 just that it is already clocked higher?

What is a C4 module?

 

[Zenthar]

What is a C4 module?

C4 is the CAS latency of 4, the number of cycles the RAM takes to achieve a given operation.

 

[pauldh]

Neither is better than the other in almost all cases when you consider gameplay settings instead of 800x600 no fsaa. I'll gladly post the 42 links from the past to back that up if need be. be prepared to get out the popcorn though. :lol:

 

[Zenthar]

At this moment E8400 will be faster in ALMOST all games... there are a few out there that can actually use quad core.

Not only does the game has to be multi-threaded to take advantage of the quad core, but the GPU must not be bottlenecking the system as well. Most games use the CPU mostly for AI, thus do not need high CPU unless they have to process for many sprites (ex: real-time strategy).

 

[kazar123]

Alright so i'm going to get the 4gb of ram but for the CPU should i get the dual core because its fast atm, or the quad will it be faster in the future?

i'm more inclined to go with the dual core because its cheaper

 

[pauldh]

Single threaded fear proves the game does not have to be multi-threaded.

3.65Ghz Quad beating 3.8GHz dual in Single threaded fear - http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2quad-q6600_8.html#sect0

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

You might be able to get the quad running beyond the dual speed but the the dual will go even higher. Take for example I am running a E8400 and bumped it up to 400Mhz x9 = 3.6Ghz on stock voltage with hardly an increase in temps. Now thats awsome. Just imagine what you could get it at with air...

 

[pauldh]

When making a buying decison consider price. How much do you want to spend? Either of those CPU's will prerform great and the same when you are gaming unless you buy a killer GPU to game at LOW res and no FSAA. Don't fall victom to the Games = e8400 bologna. So you don't need a Quad, but you also won't game better on the dual. (yet it gets repeated over and over and over....)

Decide for yourself if an 4.17GHz OC'ed e8500 really offers better gameplay than a puny stock clocked Q6600. http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_duo_e8500_wolfdale/page6.asp ( edit: I'd still say OC the Quad though too instead of gaming at stock, just using this as one example). Which leads high res in all these games tested? Will you game at 800x600 no fsaa? , or will you game at a res that is GPU bound?

 

[boonality]

Deja Vu? Nah maybe it's just me...

Search dude.

 

[kazar123]

I will probably game at 1680x1050 with dual 8800GT's

and im not asking if it will help me game better i just wanted to know which would give better performance

 

[pauldh]

Honestly, there is no wrong choice. If it is strictly for gaming I don't think the Q9450 is worth the extra $150. So I would go for the e8400 in that case. The Q6600 vs e8400 is more a direct comparison at both about $200.

BTW, sounds like a nice rig; enjoy.

 

[kazar123]

Thanks for all your help i think im going to go with the dual core

also with a liquid cooled CPU and a 900watt power supply how much could i overclock it, with it still having a good life-span

 

[grieve]

I will probably game at 1680x1050 with dual 8800GT's

and im not asking if it will help me game better i just wanted to know which would give better performance

I bet you would not see any difference between a q6600 and a e8400 in any game... maybe 1 FPS. Games are all GPU, when i play games on my q6600 it never hits 100%, not even 20%, I am willing to bet the e8400 is the same.

Personally i would go for a quad.

 

[tecninja]

Quads are handy for being able to absorb more TSRs, background utilities and Malware in the background without hitting your performance.

In a controlled test environment with nothing else running the dual core and quad core are probably going to be very similar with the Dual core winning if it has a significant clockspeed advantage over the quad.

In the real world where you have 40 processes running in the background like your browser, your firewall, 17 updater programs, weather bug, Instant messenger, Virus Scan, 3 Anti Malware programs, 20 Malware processes that you got infected with anyways...., then More cores = Good.

just my $0.02

 

[grieve]

Quads are handy for being able to absorb more TSRs, background utilities and Malware in the background without hitting your performance.

In a controlled test environment with nothing else running the dual core and quad core are probably going to be very similar with the Dual core winning if it has a significant clockspeed advantage over the quad.

In the real world where you have 40 processes running in the background like your browser, your firewall, 17 updater programs, weather bug, Instant messenger, Virus Scan, 3 Anti Malware programs, 20 Malware processes that you got infected with anyways...., then More cores = Good.

just my $0.02

Agreed...
if you have a quad you really dont have to log into windows and kill apps then go play a game...
just run everything.

benchmarks arnt everything... real life situation is whats important and as you mentioned i have 2347623784 things running in the background which makes a quad ideal.