Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Quad-core or six core?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 18, 2011 7:12:56 PM

I'm in the process of upgrading my PC, and after purchasing a new GPU I figured the processor could use a boost too. I'm looking into purchasing a more powerful quad-core at the moment, but my motherboard is capable of a six core CPU as well. Do you guys think it would be a better investment to upgrade to a six core or stick with a quad-core? From what I've read games have just recently started taking advantage of them (the quads.)

More about : quad core core

a c 850 à CPUs
December 18, 2011 7:20:03 PM

For gaming a faster quad will do better than a slower 6 core since the additional cores do not add to gaming performance.
m
0
l
a c 146 à CPUs
December 18, 2011 8:33:59 PM

It will really depend on what your doing. For gaming as Rolli said you really only need a four core right now. Games are moving towards using more threads but right now most only use about 2 or 3 cores. So there is no real need for a six core processor since game's right now won't come close to maxing out all six cores. If though you are going to be doing something that needs alot of threads like encoding or using a program where your creating and editing 3D images for a movie then you're better off with something like a six core processor.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
December 18, 2011 8:57:20 PM

Crysis2/farCry2/BC3 all benefit from extra cores/extra thread capable processors...... as do others. if you can swing it the 2600k/maybe even the 2600 ( i'd have to check the architecture ) would fulfill your needs for some time to come.

check the games

http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx-8150--8120-6100-an...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 18, 2011 8:58:04 PM

The move from quad to hex is different from dual to quad.

Very little benefits from hex over quad. Exceptions are CAD software and video editing.

Almost everything from general use to most games benefits from quad over dual.
m
0
l
December 19, 2011 12:39:12 AM

Thanks for the answers everyone, you've been very helpful. I do have a few more questions, though.

When it comes to upgrading a processor, what specs am I looking for specifically? For example, when upgrading a GPU the number of processing cores, as well as the core/memory/shader clocks are the specs one would likely first check out before deciding to buy a particular model. As far as CPUs go, what specs determine the overall performance and efficiency of the processor?
m
0
l
a c 146 à CPUs
December 19, 2011 1:03:22 AM

You want to look at the cache, the frequency and benchmarks for what you want to do. If your building the computer for gaming look at benchmarks to see how the game performs.
m
0
l
a c 471 à CPUs
December 19, 2011 1:10:36 AM

Most importantly you want to look at benchmarks regardless of the specs. If a CPU is poorly designed, then no matter how good it looks on paper, it will suck.
m
0
l
a c 850 à CPUs
December 19, 2011 1:10:48 AM

Loyal-T said:
Thanks for the answers everyone, you've been very helpful. I do have a few more questions, though.

When it comes to upgrading a processor, what specs am I looking for specifically? For example, when upgrading a GPU the number of processing cores, as well as the core/memory/shader clocks are the specs one would likely first check out before deciding to buy a particular model. As far as CPUs go, what specs determine the overall performance and efficiency of the processor?

On GPU's you can only do that on the same models! Different architectures prevent direct cross comparison. The only way to do that is with benchmarks example http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_56...
Same applies to CPU's, here is a handy tool http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=443
m
0
l
a c 146 à CPUs
December 19, 2011 1:15:17 AM

jaguarskx said:
Most importantly you want to look at benchmarks regardless of the specs. If a CPU is poorly designed, then no matter how good it looks on paper, it will suck.


COUGH COUGH Bulldozer.
m
0
l
December 21, 2011 4:32:59 AM

You all have been very helpful. I have one last question.

I found a CPU I'm looking to buy, and upon further inspection I've noticed that my current processor has no L3 cache, but this one does. How much of a performance increase do you think this extra cache would warrant (on top of a faster FSB as well)?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 24, 2011 4:22:18 AM

L3 cache means a lot.
m
0
l
a c 83 à CPUs
December 24, 2011 4:34:32 AM

Loyal-T said:
You all have been very helpful. I have one last question.

I found a CPU I'm looking to buy, and upon further inspection I've noticed that my current processor has no L3 cache, but this one does. How much of a performance increase do you think this extra cache would warrant (on top of a faster FSB as well)?



If your talking about an Athlon II vs Phenom II, the only difference is the L3 cache and it varies greatly by application.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/85?vs=106

Those 2 processors have the exact same clock speed, only difference is the L3 cache, so you can see for your self. Phenom II usually has higher clock speeds too, which will further improve performance.
m
0
l
December 24, 2011 8:05:26 AM

sorry mispost
m
0
l
!