------------------------------ Australian internet at its best...
Core i7 920 @ 3.76 ghz > Thermalright u120 > Thermaltake 850w psu > Hd 5870 + 5870 vapor x
> DDR3 1600mhz > ex58ud4p
Reply to heroofspirits
------------------------------ Australian internet at its best...
Core i7 920 @ 3.76 ghz > Thermalright u120 > Thermaltake 850w psu > Hd 5870 + 5870 vapor x
> DDR3 1600mhz > ex58ud4p
Reply to heroofspirits
thanks for the help guys wont waist the money then!
------------------------------ Australian internet at its best...
Core i7 920 @ 3.76 ghz > Thermalright u120 > Thermaltake 850w psu > Hd 5870 + 5870 vapor x
> DDR3 1600mhz > ex58ud4p
Reply to heroofspirits
I disagree 100%, especially since we don't know why he needs to upgrade. Besides, I'm a firm beliver that in two years or less, quads for gaming will be a requirement.
I disagree 100%, especially since we don't know why he needs to upgrade. Besides, I'm a firm beliver that in two years or less, quads for gaming will be a requirement.
I'm using q9550 OCed to 3.6 right now, not that great.
If u want quad core, go with AMD Deneb. That's much better.
Intel's quad core is fake quad. so in quad processing, it has bottleneck problem, and no-memory controller, no hyperthreading stress the motherboard alot.
B4 system was AMD Brisbane, it was kinda slow but it didn't cause freezing in. But q9550 cause freezing problem sometimes.
nightsilencer actually made a point i didn't think to bring up; Quads will start to have price jumps within the next few years, and given how the best quad (Q9650) is only around $125 more then the best Duo (E8600), and more mainstream quads (Q9550/Q9450) are even more competitive, it makes little sense to go with a duo at this point, knowing you'll probably upgrade within a year or two anyway.
in 2 years he'll be using a completely different computer for gaming. why would you get a quad now for gaiming in 2 years? overclock that e8500 as far as you can and call it a day. frankly, a 4ghz dualcore will game WAY better than a 3ghz quadcore. quadcores are only useful for transcoding or rendering photoshop, or something.
yes for now, but the Quad-core gaming revolution has already begun, and quantum processing units won't come into play for a good few years.
Why? because once they hit consumers the application developers still need to work on programs for the architecture so it may take 1 or 2 years after consumer quantum that it becomes mainstream, but more likely Graphene will take over from silicon and he won't have to worry as much though the requirements may become much higher.
in 2 years he'll be using a completely different computer for gaming. why would you get a quad now for gaiming in 2 years? overclock that e8500 as far as you can and call it a day. frankly, a 4ghz dualcore will game WAY better than a 3ghz quadcore. quadcores are only useful for transcoding or rendering photoshop, or something.
probz will use different comp. i will take the 4 ghz e8500 for as long as i can thanks!
------------------------------ Australian internet at its best...
Core i7 920 @ 3.76 ghz > Thermalright u120 > Thermaltake 850w psu > Hd 5870 + 5870 vapor x
> DDR3 1600mhz > ex58ud4p
Reply to heroofspirits
Sounds like heroofspirits got his answer, unfortunately it was the wrong one.
If anyone else comes across this thread, please be advised that it's a total crap festival.
neon neophyte wrote: "I've just smoked a butt load of weed and can tell you a 4ghz dualcore will game WAY better than a 3ghz quadcore"
For starters, when comparing any two contemporary cpu's the first thing you should look at isn't the clock speed but rather the BUS speed. In this case both are 1333 mhz so they have about the same bottleneck when they send info to your system's ram. Next you want to compare the L2 cache size. The e8500 has half the cache (6mb) of a q9550 which leads to an ENORMOUS disparity in performance. This is because the L2 cache is used as a workaround for the bus speed. A higher L2 means a higher bottleneck. Even if you factor in Amdahl's law and the whopping 0.3 ghz difference on the clock, you're still much better off with a Yorkfield q9xxx. (Although at 95w tdp you need some pretty impressive cooling for overclocking the quads).
In short the e8500, while a good cpu, is in fact inferior to the q9550 especially when it comes to gaming.
Message edited by J0SEPH on 07-23-2009 at 10:03:03 AM