I'm starting to look at options for my new build coming up in a few months. I know that pricing and options will be significantly different by then but since it has been so long since my last build I need to catch up a bit on what the current standards are.
The rig is primarily for gaming. I dont need dual monitors at max res, but I want it to be able to handle anything I throw at it on high settings. Right now I am running an AthlonX2 6000+. It seems to me that I would be downgrading if I went to a quad running at, say, 2.8 per core. I know a lot of the newer games and apps will take advantage of a quad, but for ones that dont, or dont even make use of a dual core, then my performance would take a hit rather than improve. Lets say an older game like the original Supreme Commander, I can manage to bog my rig down with that one even thought its over 3 years old, and afaik it will only take advantage of 2 cores. So "upgrading" to a quad with slower cores would hurt. No?
Your Athlon X2 6000 is either 90nm or 65nm depending which one you have since you didn't specify, and it's based on the old K8 core. The newer Phenom II processors are 45nm, clock much higher if you overclock, and are based on the Stars core commonly referred to as K10. To sum it up the new processors do more work at the same clock speed.
You can get a decent comparison of the processors Here