Quad vs Duo Core

[reidthaler]

I'm still pretty confused about Quad vs Duo. What I've read and see in benchmarks is that Photoshop does better with a faster clockspeed, so for the money, that would point to Duos (E8500, 3.16 is $190 vs Q6600 for $10 less) especially when you look at 45nm (E8500) vs 65nm (Q6600), and FSB 1333MHz (E8500) vs 1066MHz (Q6600)

Does a quad core perform better overall on a computer system that still point to going with quad over a Duo? What am I missing? Money is not a free flowing as it used to be.

I'm not a gamer and not interested in OC particularly, more interested in a stable, quiet system.

I'll building with an Asus P5Q Pro, 8 GB RAM, Antec P182 case

Thanks!

Reid

 

[htoonthura]

I'm still pretty confused about Quad vs Duo. What I've read and see in benchmarks is that Photoshop does better with a faster clockspeed, so for the money, that would point to Duos (E8500, 3.16 is $190 vs Q6600 for $10 less) especially when you look at 45nm (E8500) vs 65nm (Q6600), and FSB 1333MHz (E8500) vs 1066MHz (Q6600)

Does a quad core perform better overall on a computer system that still point to going with quad over a Duo? What am I missing? Money is not a free flowing as it used to be.

I'm not a gamer and not interested in OC particularly, more interested in a stable, quiet system.

I'll building with an Asus P5Q Pro, 8 GB RAM, Antec P182 case

Thanks!

Reid

If you do not oc, go with E8500.

 

[br3nd064]

If you don't game and you do a lot of multitasking, get the q6600. Also, it would be very simple and easy to overclock it to 3ghz (some do it on stock voltage) so you don't have to get too involved in it if you don't want to.

 

[Guest]

how long are you looking to keep your system?

Any length of time... greater than 2 years and you'll want a quad... and overclocked quad

I currently have a quad... and tbh its much smoother than my dual core (65nm... went to 45) games have much higher minimum fps too

But if your looking for a quick easy build that will last you 1 - 2 years go for the dual as it will be cheaper and probably better performance right now, i went quad because I didn't see nehalem doing much for gaming... which is what i use my system for... so I just got a quad and oced it a lot (3.85 ghz) i'll push it more when i get my watercooling setup... setup hehe

 

[reidthaler]

I'll likely be keeping my system for a couple of years.

Would you still recommend the Q6600 or pushing myself financially and go with one of the 45nm quads? which one?

For OCing, can I simply OC with the OC in the BIOS and not mess with voltages and timing? Would this the be decent RAM? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145184

Thanks!

Reid

 

[aznguy0028]

if you're gonna keep it a couple of years, quad all the way. since you're not going to game and are just interested in a stable system, i would say the Q6600 would be in your ballpark.

quads are better than duos in overall system performance. i have both a quad and a duo core system, tbh, i rarely ever use my duo core cuz it's so slow compared to the quad in responsiveness and multi-tasking with programs.

i can never go back to anything below a quad (not to sound snobby) but it's true. i've used my friends system that are like 3.6ghz (E8400) and i wasn't impressed.

one last note, if you're gonna buy a Q6600 or anything for that matter, 4gb is plenty of ram, i think 8gb is a bit of an overkill, unless you got some killer deal, then go for it

one last last note, go read the OC-guide in the overclocking section of the forum, it's a sticky. maybe one day you'll be itchin' for performance out of ur Q6600 and will decide to OC

 

[reidthaler]

OK, thanks for helping me setting the question for the day.

What about the other questions I raised:

Would you still recommend the Q6600 or pushing myself financially and go with one of the 45nm quads? which one?

For OCing, can I simply OC with the OC in the BIOS and not mess with voltages and timing? Would this the be decent RAM? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6820145184

Thanks!

Reid

 

[br3nd064]

The Q6600 will get you more for your money. I'd say just get that until the prices on 45nm quad's drop. Sometimes, you'll be able to push the Q6600 to 3ghz on stock voltages. i can't speak first-hand for that ram, but the specs look good.

 

[roadrunner197069]

If your not going to OC drop the motherboard for something way cheaper. If you want some major performance come here and we will help you overclock it. It is simple.

The q6600 will oc to 3.4-3.6 easy with a good cooler.
The e8500 if you get E0 stepping will overclock to 4.5 easy.

 

[reidthaler]

Roadrunner,

I'm open to OCing, but not at the cost of stability. The last time I OCed in the BIOS, I think it screwed up my signal to my printer and messed up my prints. It could have been that my RAM wasn't up to the task.

Is the RAM I mentioned in one of my above posts suitable for OCing? Quietness is a big concern which is why I've picked the case, Antec P182, and the cooler I have (likely XIGMATEK HDT-S1283 so I can run a quiet Scythe S-Flex Fan - SFF21E fan at 1K rpm.

The mobo was only $100, and it's siting on my desk, so that's a keeper.

Are the new CPUs marked EO?

So it sound like the e8500 would be better has it is 45nm so it would run cooler, and cheaper, and produce less heat.

It's all so confusing. I've read other posts by folks that say if I'm going to keep the system for 2 or more years, I should go Quad.

Reid

 

[roadrunner197069]

Well for 3.6 on the Q6600 any 800 ram will do.

For 4.5 on the dual you would need a E0 "no they dont say E0" you need DDR2 1000 ram.

When you overclock you run Prime 95 for a minimum of 8 hours and monitor temps so they dont ever go over 70c. If it crashes your not stable, and you need to readjust. If it runs 8 hours your pretty much golden.

I have overclocked alot of rigs. I would be happy to walk you through it when you are ready.

 

[br3nd064]

You don't have to worry about stability as long as you don't push it too far. If you're going to be pushing the e8500 to ~4.5ghz, I'd go with ddr2 1066 ram.

Honestly though, if you're not upgrading for several years, get a quad (Q6600). If you want to spend more and have it run cooler, get something like the Q9450 or Q9550.

 

[englandr753]

Dont push yourself financially to build a pc. Its not worth it no matter what cpu you get. If you want to have a very quiete system and are looking to make this rig last for a while I would get:

Q6600 CPU (run stock with stock heatsink)
Antec 300 Case
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129042&Tpk=antec%20300
Corsair Power Supply

Microcenter had the Antec 300 for 34.99!

I am telling you this from experience in buying this case above with the corsair power supply it is the quietest setup I have ever built. I have to look at the little blue light at the top of the case to make sure its still running.

If you later decide you need more power, then you simply buy an aftermarket cpu cooler and hit 3.0 ghz or more. Thats 25% + overclocking and stable!

You wont be disappointed with this setup I promise you...

 

[reidthaler]

englandr753,

I think I this point I'm down to choosing the CPU and RAM as I already splurged on the P182 case (I had been appreciating it for some time, and was tired of my old POS case.) Plus, I wanted something quiet and that seemed to be the best.

So far, my list looks like this:

Asus P5Q Pro
Antec P182 case
Undecided. Likely Intel Q6600
XIGMATEK HDT-S1283 heatsink and Scythe S-Flex Fan - SFF21E
8GB (2 2x2GB) BRAND UNDECIDED
1 Samsung SATA 750 GB (reused)
1 Samsung SATA 500 GB (reused)
1 Seagate IDE 200 GB scratch drive (reused)
ASUS EN7300GT SILENT/HTD/512M GeForce 7300GT
IDE CDRW (reused)
Seasonic 460w Power Supply (reused)
Vista x64

I like your reasoned approach and sanity check

Reid

 

[englandr753]

I really dont think you will benefit having 8 gigs of ram unless you do some seriously intensive tasks. I have 4 gigs and sometimes use up to 3 gigs and am a heavy gamer at best.

So unless you are getting a 2 for 1 sale on the memory I would drop to 4 gigs and pocket some money.

I would later think about upgrading the video card and power supply as this will be the weakest links in your system.

 

[geofelt]

You might want to read this article about photoshop and multi core.
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2006/12/photoshop_and_multicore.html

It is a bit dated, but if I read it correctly, the new nehalem/i7 cpu's will be wonderful for photoshop. If your budget for cpu is in the $300 range, then it will be good to wait for it's launch in (supposed) November.

 

[reidthaler]

Thanks for the link to the article.

I had thought about waiting for Nehalem and then thought that the additional cost of being an early adapter (Nehalem will require DDR3 RAM--$$$) wouldn't justify the benefit it would offer.

I've been gathering some of the components--Asus P5Q Pro, Antec P192 case, (still looking for RAM) but most posts point to the Q6600 as being the best bang/buck solution.

Reid

 

[gamerk316]

The pirces for i7 are out: ~$350 for each the CPU and the mobo, plus the cost of DDR3, some of which won't work to begin with...

Is it really worth it to spend close to $1000 extra on i7? I doubt it.

 

[evongugg]

OCZ 8 GB is the most compatible I know of.
If you have problems:

Increase voltage to 2.1v. Relax timings.
Set the RAM voltage to max and bump up the NB voltage untill its stable.
It's hard on the Northbridge with 8 Gig. Plus you need to set the tRFC over 54.

 

[amdbuilder]

I know nothing compared to the guys on here but I'm researching the same stuff and asking the same Q...

and my current thinking is I'm not going to rebuild for another 2-3 years HOWEVER the 8500 OC'd seems a better choice at the minute and from what I understand by the time software properly utilises the quad core for it to be definitely better than dual the quads now will be obsolete and you'll need a different quad (45nm etc).... so I'm going to do this:

1) get a 8500 OC'd for now...
2) use it for 2-3 years then...
3) if/when I need to go quad I won't rebuild I'll simply change the CPU and buy a quad *when I need to*, thus not needing to rebuild a whole new system plus I'll actuall have a decent quad when I need it.

The alternative seems to be tolerate a mediocre quad (e6600) for a couple of years without really needing it when e8500 would be better... and then when I actually need the quad in a couple of years find that it's an old slow obsolete version and I'll need a new beter one anyway!

I never understood the concept of "futureproofing". From what I've seen anythin that you buy to be "futureproof" will be superseded by much better versions in the future anyway. Nothing is futureproof.

 

[br3nd064]

I know nothing compared to the guys on here but I'm researching the same stuff and asking the same Q...

and my current thinking is I'm not going to rebuild for another 2-3 years HOWEVER the 8500 OC'd seems a better choice at the minute and from what I understand by the time software properly utilises the quad core for it to be definitely better than dual the quads now will be obsolete and you'll need a different quad (45nm etc).... so I'm going to do this:

1) get a 8500 OC'd for now...
2) use it for 2-3 years then...
3) if/when I need to go quad I won't rebuild I'll simply change the CPU and buy a quad *when I need to*, thus not needing to rebuild a whole new system plus I'll actuall have a decent quad when I need it.

The alternative seems to be tolerate a mediocre quad (e6600) for a couple of years without really needing it when e8500 would be better... and then when I actually need the quad in a couple of years find that it's an old slow obsolete version and I'll need a new beter one anyway!

I never understood the concept of "futureproofing". From what I've seen anythin that you buy to be "futureproof" will be superseded by much better versions in the future anyway. Nothing is futureproof.

That's what my thinking was when I built this computer. I bought a e8500, overclocked it, and if I need to in the future, I'll just swap out the CPU.

 

[reidthaler]

What do you think of the Q9300? I know it doesn't have the OC potential of the Q6600, but I like the idea of low power consumption, so less heat, and less need for noisy cooling. If I could get one for $200 I'd be interested. I would think the reduced power consumption over time would pay for the cost difference.

From http://hothardware.com/Articles/Intel-Core-2-Quad-Q9300-Processor/?page=8

What is most impressive is that even when overclocked to 3.3 GHz, the power consumption of this processor is roughly at the same level as a Core 2 Quad Q6600 processor at a stock 2.4 GHz. Even with nearly a 1 GHz clock speed difference there is nearly no difference in power consumption, which is a testament to Intel's Penryn microarchitecture and its advanced manufacturing prowess.

Reid

 

[br3nd064]

If you want low power consumption, then yes, you'll like the q9300. Personally, I would stay away from it because it has a smaller cache and, since the multiplier is only x7.5, the overclocking is limited.

I'm looking back at your original post, and yes, it looks like the q9300 would be good for you since you're not gaming or overclocking.

 

[reidthaler]

Thanks for your review of my post. It looks like the Q6600 is the gold standard for bang/buck and overclocking.

Since I'm not a gamer and not hugely interested in OCing, except I love to learn new things, and it uses less power and produces less heat, it may be a good choice if I can get a good price.

Reid

 

[Abydosone]

I am actually have the same debate with choosing parts for my sisters gaming rig. I also need to finish my rig as well (bought a P35 board and new memory for a P4 530 and 7900 GT). I like the 45nm cores, since they run a lot cooler, as heat is an issue with me. So the Q9300 looks good, however the E8400 is at $170, and I have read that dual cores dominate when it comes to games. I usually am a gamer on this PC, however I do some video conversion for my ipod once in a while.

My sisters rig is going to be used for gaming most likely, a lot of internet usage and other things like instant messaging and multi-tasking. I am thinking that an E8400 would be perfect, because it is still a big upgrade from a socket 478 Pentium 4 @ 3ghz.

The thing to keep in mind is that prices for current quad cores and core 2 extremes will be coming down after the release of Nehalem, so there is always room to grow by upgrading to a quad.

Anyways, I am still undecided which to get for my build, Q9300 or E8400. Any advice would be appreciated.