Scotteq
Splendid
- Aug 7, 2007
- 3,958
- 0
- 23,460
Yes - If you're not significantly multitasking, then a faster dual core would be the choice for gaming - with the understanding that gaming performance is primarily driven by graphics rather than Processor.
A deeper answer will mention that it also depends on what kind of games you like to play. If there's significant AI - like in certain FPSs and newer RTS games - then there can be benefit from more cores available to run those threads. But as mentioned in the other thread, this is highly dependent on how well the publisher coded for multithreading.
A deeper answer will mention that it also depends on what kind of games you like to play. If there's significant AI - like in certain FPSs and newer RTS games - then there can be benefit from more cores available to run those threads. But as mentioned in the other thread, this is highly dependent on how well the publisher coded for multithreading.
most quad cores will overclock to the point that the benefit of the dual core is eliminated for gaming....and the quad core is much better for multitasking. So unless you ONLY game with nothing going on in the background, and can't afford the extra $50 or so for a quad core I would recommend a quad core
Lippy13
Distinguished
- Jun 4, 2009
- 29
- 0
- 18,530
These days I think quad cores have a slight advantage over dual cores, as more and more games make use of the extra cores. However, many games usually hit a graphics bottleneck first, which is why I'm not jumping at them just yet. My E8400 is still good enough for now. If I had to upgrade right now though, I would probably go for a quad core instead.
As Scotteq said, it really depends on what games you play. If you like sandbox-type games, they tend to be heavy on the CPU and you will see significant improvements on a quad core compared to dual core, even at higher resolutions.
As Scotteq said, it really depends on what games you play. If you like sandbox-type games, they tend to be heavy on the CPU and you will see significant improvements on a quad core compared to dual core, even at higher resolutions.
nocteratus
Distinguished
- Mar 6, 2007
- 369
- 5
- 18,815
it depends on the game itself...
GTA4 is optimized for quads... so with the same clock speed the quad will win over the dual.
But non-optimized games will be almost neck to neck but with a slight advantage for the dual over the quad.
GTA4 is optimized for quads... so with the same clock speed the quad will win over the dual.
But non-optimized games will be almost neck to neck but with a slight advantage for the dual over the quad.
Mousemonkey
Titan
- Sep 3, 2006
- 59,466
- 17
- 92,965
roco_nights
Distinguished
- Apr 25, 2007
- 25
- 0
- 18,530
I would definetly recommend a quad core... maybe you will not notice a huge benefit right now, but there's a big chance most dual cores won't be able to handle next year's demanding games... unless they're intel 7XXX or 8XXX series overclocked
geofelt
Titan
- Oct 9, 2006
- 54,307
- 4,147
- 174,240
At a clock rate of 3.0 or better, the vga card is much more important for gaming than the cpu.
At that level, overclocking is good for bragging, but it will not net you as much increase
in FPS as a better vga card will. Today, very few games can make use of more than two cores.
Flight simulator X and supreme commander are exceptions. It is not a trivial matter to code multi threaded programs,
and game vendors will not sell too many games that require quads to run.
I don't see this changing in the next couple of years.
Net: a faster duo for the increased clock speed.
At that level, overclocking is good for bragging, but it will not net you as much increase
in FPS as a better vga card will. Today, very few games can make use of more than two cores.
Flight simulator X and supreme commander are exceptions. It is not a trivial matter to code multi threaded programs,
and game vendors will not sell too many games that require quads to run.
I don't see this changing in the next couple of years.
Net: a faster duo for the increased clock speed.
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
Find it funny no ones mentioning the coming Intel duals? You know, the ones done on a smaller proccess, with possibly higher oc potential , and lets not forget, SMT, which may have impact in all this, not just gaming
roco_nights
Distinguished
- Apr 25, 2007
- 25
- 0
- 18,530
Sure dual cores are enough for all games today, but who wants to buy a computer just to replace it in 6 months? The big deal about quad core and gaming is that they're almost future-proof. We don't know when Quad cores are going to be demanded by most games, but it WILL HAPPEN... besides they are getting cheaper....
Right now a slow quad core will be outperformed by a fast dual core (eg. phenom 9650 vs. c2d 8500), but the tables will turn soon... moreover, the slowest quad core right now can handdle ANY game if it is coupled with a nice GPU...
Right now a slow quad core will be outperformed by a fast dual core (eg. phenom 9650 vs. c2d 8500), but the tables will turn soon... moreover, the slowest quad core right now can handdle ANY game if it is coupled with a nice GPU...
blackhawk1928
Distinguished
- Jul 15, 2008
- 2,990
- 0
- 20,960
I recommend getting a Xeon 6-core processor, that will be kick-*** for gaming 
but its gonna cost you more then 3k for it. Just kidding, its a server processor
-on a more serious note, many games today are probably going to be optimized more for duals over quads, but tomorrows games are going to be for quads, so go for a quad.
but its gonna cost you more then 3k for it. Just kidding, its a server processor-on a more serious note, many games today are probably going to be optimized more for duals over quads, but tomorrows games are going to be for quads, so go for a quad.
megamanx00
Splendid
- Sep 3, 2008
- 8,216
- 2
- 31,465
Right now, a higher clocked dual core is generally better for gaming. Still, more games are starting to take advantage of more than one core and DX11 is being designed to better take advantage of multiple cores. Of course if MS delivers on that or not is anyone's guess 
.
.I had a Intel E7200 @ 3.8Ghz, getting 80-100fps on COD4 max setting, 45fps on Farcry 2 MED settings. 1680 res
now Intel Q9550 @ 3.4Ghz, 120-160fps on COD4 max setting, 40fps on Farcry 2 VERY HIGH settings, 1680 res.
My improvement may be due to the higher cache of the 9550, but no denying. I am getting much better performance out of the quad, even at lower clock.
now Intel Q9550 @ 3.4Ghz, 120-160fps on COD4 max setting, 40fps on Farcry 2 VERY HIGH settings, 1680 res.
My improvement may be due to the higher cache of the 9550, but no denying. I am getting much better performance out of the quad, even at lower clock.
You suck you fat ass noob, this isn't a celebrity magazine! No one gives a *** about that so usefull info.
Get a quad core
, the newest quad cores can actually easily reach above 4+ GHz, which makes them competitive with the dual cores at the same speed, because remember... If a game can use 2 cores it a quad core will still work well just 2 cores than can/will be used for other stuff like antivirus software and such so you can search your system for badassware while gaming 
Because it seems like people are thinking "Hey, quad cores need a program to use 4 cores omgz, with dual x2 core i can play 2 core in gaming, wow gaming i run cool game for super speed overclock quad core suck my ballz!" 
Better to invest in a quad core as it will give you more power in the future! 
WHOOPS missed it.
@OP
Your triple core core cpu is running at 2100mhz
Min recommend for games is 2500
It would be nice if you could swap out that triple for a Phenom II Triple 720BE
Everything would be the same only faster, and it oclox like crazy too. Also faster overall throughput.
I don't know your mobo - but check with manufacturers cpu compatibility list, if possible, and consider a faster triple core than the slow one you have. Vidcard is plentiful. It's your stock clox. And that triple you have will not oclox very much either. If the 720 fits, problem solved.
Alt choice = dualcore = Phenom II 550 BE @ 3.1 Ghz, also oclox.
Alt choice PhII Quad - but it's a waste for gaming - won't use all those cores.
Quad is useless - you already have most of a quad with your existing triple - it's the clock speed causing limited data throughput to GPU.
@OP
Your triple core core cpu is running at 2100mhz
Min recommend for games is 2500
It would be nice if you could swap out that triple for a Phenom II Triple 720BE
Everything would be the same only faster, and it oclox like crazy too. Also faster overall throughput.
I don't know your mobo - but check with manufacturers cpu compatibility list, if possible, and consider a faster triple core than the slow one you have. Vidcard is plentiful. It's your stock clox. And that triple you have will not oclox very much either. If the 720 fits, problem solved.
Alt choice = dualcore = Phenom II 550 BE @ 3.1 Ghz, also oclox.
Alt choice PhII Quad - but it's a waste for gaming - won't use all those cores.
Quad is useless - you already have most of a quad with your existing triple - it's the clock speed causing limited data throughput to GPU.
Mousemonkey
Titan
- Sep 3, 2006
- 59,466
- 17
- 92,965
UltraO :
You suck you fat ass noob, this isn't a celebrity magazine! No one gives a *** about that so usefull info.
Get a quad core , the newest quad cores can actually easily reach above 4+ GHz, which makes them competitive with the dual cores at the same speed, because remember... If a game can use 2 cores it a quad core will still work well just 2 cores than can/will be used for other stuff like antivirus software and such so you can search your system for badassware while gaming Because it seems like people are thinking "Hey, quad cores need a program to use 4 cores omgz, with dual x2 core i can play 2 core in gaming, wow gaming i run cool game for super speed overclock quad core suck my ballz!" Better to invest in a quad core as it will give you more power in the future!
Get a quad core
, the newest quad cores can actually easily reach above 4+ GHz, which makes them competitive with the dual cores at the same speed, because remember... If a game can use 2 cores it a quad core will still work well just 2 cores than can/will be used for other stuff like antivirus software and such so you can search your system for badassware while gaming Because it seems like people are thinking "Hey, quad cores need a program to use 4 cores omgz, with dual x2 core i can play 2 core in gaming, wow gaming i run cool game for super speed overclock quad core suck my ballz!" Better to invest in a quad core as it will give you more power in the future!
Jealousy is a cruel mistress, perhaps if you had studied harder your grammar would not be so poor, which may have lead to a better paid job giving you the ability to afford more than one machine.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram