Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

clock-speed-multi-cores

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 31, 2010 10:56:00 PM

Hello,
I was wondering if having 4 cores would benefit if I ran dual monitors. I would be (for example) watching TV on one, working on Excel on the other, while burning a dvd. I would run multiple apps at one time (internet, excel, word, tv, ext..) Would all 4 cores be used in a scenario like this? or would 2 cores with a faster clock speed be better?
I was debating between the intel core i5 661 vs i5 760.

any advice?
October 31, 2010 11:54:18 PM

Since you are deciding between those two cpu's you should definitely go with the i5 760. They are the same price and the 760 is a much better all around cpu. Even if the apps you are running don't utilize all four cores, the turbo boost technology will make up for any differences in clock speed.

Definitely go for the i5 760.
m
0
l
November 1, 2010 12:54:13 AM

I stand corrected and i agree with Raidur that the I3 will give you enough juice. The i5 will prolly be a tad bit overkill, but it would be faster. You would see it in the boot time, load time of programs, but in overall performance it wouldn't make much of a difference.

If you want to dual monitor even if your only watching tv and doing light work i would go with a decent GPU. Bot only does it need to support dual monitors it needs to be able to run aero (If you have Vista/7), run and video tasks such as watching TV, at the same time. The old cards just don't do it anymore (Unless of course all you plan on doing is Excel and the ocasonal streaming or watcting TV). I would try a low end ATI 5XXX or a Nvidia GT 240 or a Nivida 9XXXGT(S/X/+) or a GT 210 (Cheaper...) if you are on a budget and don't game.
m
0
l
November 1, 2010 12:55:24 AM

amk09 said:
Even if the apps you are running don't utilize all four cores, the turbo boost technology will make up for any differences in clock speed.


(Edit) The turbo boost won't help out in the apps he's using. The first time around i didn't see that he is using lighter apps :lol: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 1, 2010 1:17:18 AM

None of those tasks look CPU intensive, you could save money and go with an i3 me thinks.

Stay away from the i5-6** dual cores, they are i3's but with turbo and higher multipliers (not worth the premium over the i3 duals).
m
0
l
November 1, 2010 1:38:35 AM

gidgiddonihah said:
I stand corrected and i agree with Raidur that the I3 will give you enough juice. The i5 will prolly be a tad bit overkill, but it would be faster. You would see it in the boot time, load time of programs, but in overall performance it wouldn't make much of a difference.

If you want to dual monitor even if your only watching tv and doing light work i would go with a decent GPU. Bot only does it need to support dual monitors it needs to be able to run aero (If you have Vista/7), run and video tasks such as watching TV, at the same time. The old cards just don't do it anymore (Unless of course all you plan on doing is Excel and the ocasonal streaming or watcting TV). I would try a low end ATI 5XXX or a Nvidia GT 240 or a Nivida 9XXXGT(S/X/+) or a GT 210 (Cheaper...) if you are on a budget and don't game.



I was thinking of going with the XFX Radeon HD 5770 video card. Would that support watching tv on one monitor and doing work on another, with windows 7?

What kind of apps would you need all 4 cores for? besides video games? I would also be running solid works, Matlab, and maybe some other CAD programs. Would this graphics card be the one to get?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 1, 2010 1:41:11 AM

koba7111 said:
Hello,
I was wondering if having 4 cores would benefit if I ran dual monitors. I would be (for example) watching TV on one, working on Excel on the other, while burning a dvd. I would run multiple apps at one time (internet, excel, word, tv, ext..) Would all 4 cores be used in a scenario like this? or would 2 cores with a faster clock speed be better?
I was debating between the intel core i5 661 vs i5 760.

any advice?


Unless you want cpu power to last you for years to come with a quad core i5, i'll also agree with Raidur. What you're doing is not very cpu intensive. Heck im sure a core 2 duo would be just fine although i tend to go for more modern stuff. So go with a core i3.

Dual core i5 are a waste of money. Only core i5 you should get are the quad cores. ;) 



Happy Halloween! :whistle: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 1, 2010 1:43:02 AM

koba7111 said:
I was thinking of going with the XFX Radeon HD 5770 video card. Would that support watching tv on one monitor and doing work on another, with windows 7?

What kind of apps would you need all 4 cores for? besides video games? I would also be running solid works, Matlab, and maybe some other CAD programs. Would this graphics card be the one to get?


With that update :heink:  ..... Core i5 760 would be you best friend. :) 
m
0
l
November 1, 2010 1:59:29 AM

The 5770 would be fine, though you might want to consider a 5850. But its a big stretch to get one. The question isn't if it will support it, but if it has the horsepower to run it. For CAD i would go a 5770, you won't need anything bigger than that.
m
0
l
a c 309 à CPUs
November 1, 2010 2:15:51 AM

Last fall, I helped a friend build a pc primarily for matlab use. We used a i5-660. It flew compared to his old system. We did not OC. As far as I can tell, it was a single core application that benefitted from the higher clock speeds. It ran very cool and quiet with the stock cooler. I was impressed.

The clarkdale processors have an integrated video capability that should be sufficient for your needs. It can run any two 1920 x 1200 devices. DVI, VGA,HDMI. I might opt for the 661 version with the higher graphics clock speed. If you are into overclocking, the 32nm parts gives you lots of headroom. There are two full cores, but 4 threads because of hyperthreading. I estimate the added threads are each worth about 1/3 of a full core. They can handle lower priority residual tasks.

You can always add a graphics card later. I think newer versions of matlab can make use of the cuda capabilities of the Nvidia cards. You might look into that.

If you can wait two months, Sandy bridge will launch, and be an even better thing. The starting clock rate is 3.1 and they get 15% more work on a clock for clock basis. The integrated graphics are twice as good, somewhat like a $50 discrete video card.

With lots of multitasking, get 4gb minimum. Ram is cheap, and I might get 8gb. It can only help.
m
0
l
November 1, 2010 2:42:59 AM

Stay away from the i5 6XX series. They are the i3's with the goodies of an i7... Its not worth the extra...

Personaly i would get a seperate card, but thats just me... :) 
m
0
l
!