Singlecore CPUs vs. Dualcores

LuCifer · Feb 18, 2006, 01:43 AM

I am deciding what CPU I want for next PC that I'll be getting after this one is one Sold

What do you guys think?

Ive heard that the dualcore CPUs dont do so well on the single threaded games.. and well I want to know what YOU guys think.. or experiences and such.. I was wondering, should I get an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or a FX 55 or 57? On some reviews on New3gg the people who have bought X2s.. say that they dont do good on the games out now.. becuase they are single threaded or something.. and that people should go single core.. and I want this PC to own hard.. so any information supplied or thoughts or suggestions would be GREAT!!

Thanks,

Lucifer

Drakon · Feb 18, 2006, 01:58 AM

Well you basically answered your question in your post. Many games out now don't perform as well on a dual core as they would on a single core. The only games that utilise the 2nd core is Quake 4 and I think Call of Duty 2. If you strictly game and don't really do anything else like vid encoding, rendering/editing etc, or run multiple apps at the same time, then you're better off going the single core route. If you do those things in addition to gaming, then you can see the benefits of having the 2nd core, as it makes things run a bit smoother.

LuCifer · Feb 18, 2006, 02:23 AM

Hmm.. any suggestions on a Kickass CPU? (AMD) besides an FX series? I do Photoshop a lot but thats about it.. does that count?

dipstick · Feb 18, 2006, 02:33 AM

Dual core is the way to go no matter what you do if you can afford it imho. X2's are faster than their single core brothers in everything, including gaming(4200vs3500, 4800vs4000).
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2410&p=7

Edit- photoshop should see impressive gains with X2's but im not 100% on that.

LuCifer · Feb 18, 2006, 02:43 AM

Yeah I see.. but say I did have a problem with the X2 CPU in the games right? what would be symptoms or what would I notice that would cause people to complain about them? because I just want the system to work like its supose to without having to worry about the Dualcore causing problems..

nitrousoxide52 · Feb 18, 2006, 02:56 AM

I myself have noticed nothing but gains from moving from the xp 3000+ to the x2 3800+, all of the cores on both of these cpu's run at the same frequency. Single threaded apps still ran faster on the X2. Much faster. So I'm not sure what problems people are having in games. The only hassle I've gone through is sometimes having to set the affinity. But, I haven't had to do that lately.

OmegaRED · Feb 18, 2006, 03:34 AM

Dual core without a doubt.

I've got 2 systems:

1)X2 3800@2.4ghz 9700pro
2)AMD 64 3500@2.4 x800XL

The dual core system performs almost as well in games even though it has an older graphics card. The real question is what dual core cpu you will get, not if you should get one. An Opteron 165/175 is perfect for games.

wee017 · Feb 18, 2006, 05:59 PM

Is it worth spending 100 bucks to get the 4400 rather then the 4200?

Judas · Feb 18, 2006, 06:25 PM

yes..... imo the small initial benifit from a 4400 over a 4200 due to the cache isn't REALLY noticeable.. but various applications are seeing a very clean boost from it.. .and the more the dual cores are being used .. the more likely the preformance boost will be seen...

IMO, Even a dual core 3800+ vs a 4000+ single core amd cpu out performs it by a large margin in nearly everything... people are saying "oh, nothing really uses dual core or multithreading".... although that's somewhat true... it's a load of BS in terms of if you should get it or not...

Windows automatically shoots different tasks from one core to the other depending on which is being used more..... Balanced load of the services and tasks and programs see huge preformance boosts from a dual core over a single. And games..... bah.... even when a game doesn't load across both.... tasks are loaded and ran on the other core giving your games just that much more stability... you may not see the fastest fps max.... but your stability in FPS is greatly seen if not increased...

UT2007 saposed launch will require dual core (NOT HT as it will not work)... for the major physics engine running at it's max quality... don't got dual core... and you won't be able to push it.... course much work is to be done.... but you can bet your ass UT2007 is gonna blow the doors off anything in terms of requirements and beauty...

Necrosis · Feb 18, 2006, 07:42 PM

Dualcore w/o a doubt.

Kaldar · Feb 18, 2006, 08:24 PM

dualcore

LuCifer · Feb 18, 2006, 10:49 PM

Ahh.. Thanks for input Judas.. and everyone else!!

Judas · Feb 18, 2006, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LuCifer

Ahh.. Thanks for input Judas.. and everyone else!!

just saying i see single cores being phased out as the tasks and computing is going to pretty much need it.... they'll probably keep the "workstation" computers ready for good solid single cores..

but dual cores will probably become the norm.. and the quad core cpu's will end up being the cadilac of cpu's...

The_Neon_Cowboy · Feb 19, 2006, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

yes..... imo the small initial benifit from a 4400
over a 4200 due to the cache isn't REALLY noticeable.. but various
applications are seeing a very clean boost from it.. .and the more the
dual cores are being used .. the more likely the preformance boost will
be seen...

I've read under a 64bit os that 2MB cache (1MB per core) will make
a bigger difference then it does now.... If you got the extra money by
all means buy the 4400 but for the $100 the difference its just not worth
it just for the added cache.... I went with the 4200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

just saying i see single cores being phased out as the tasks and computing is going to pretty much need it.... they'll probably keep the "workstation" computers ready for good solid single cores..

but dual cores will probably become the norm.. and the quad core cpu's will end up being the cadilac of cpu's...

Well "dual core" 820 or X2 is the recomended for vista so I think things may
change rather quickly.....

Feb 18, 2006, 01:43 AM	#1
LuCifer DH sig maker! Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Compton Posts: 1,110 Rep Power: 0	Singlecore CPUs vs. Dualcores I am deciding what CPU I want for next PC that I'll be getting after this one is one Sold What do you guys think? Ive heard that the dualcore CPUs dont do so well on the single threaded games.. and well I want to know what YOU guys think.. or experiences and such.. I was wondering, should I get an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or a FX 55 or 57? On some reviews on New3gg the people who have bought X2s.. say that they dont do good on the games out now.. becuase they are single threaded or something.. and that people should go single core.. and I want this PC to own hard.. so any information supplied or thoughts or suggestions would be GREAT!! Thanks, Lucifer __________________ [COLOR=silver] [/COLOR]

Feb 18, 2006, 02:23 AM	#3
LuCifer DH sig maker! Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Compton Posts: 1,110 Rep Power: 0	Hmm.. any suggestions on a Kickass CPU? (AMD) besides an FX series? I do Photoshop a lot but thats about it.. does that count? __________________ [COLOR=silver] [/COLOR]

Feb 18, 2006, 02:43 AM	#5
LuCifer DH sig maker! Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Compton Posts: 1,110 Rep Power: 0	Yeah I see.. but say I did have a problem with the X2 CPU in the games right? what would be symptoms or what would I notice that would cause people to complain about them? because I just want the system to work like its supose to without having to worry about the Dualcore causing problems.. __________________ [COLOR=silver] [/COLOR]

Feb 18, 2006, 02:56 AM	#6
nitrousoxide52 Driverheaven.com err .net Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 1,719 Rep Power: 0	I myself have noticed nothing but gains from moving from the xp 3000+ to the x2 3800+, all of the cores on both of these cpu's run at the same frequency. Single threaded apps still ran faster on the X2. Much faster. So I'm not sure what problems people are having in games. The only hassle I've gone through is sometimes having to set the affinity. But, I haven't had to do that lately. __________________ AMD Athlon64 X2 3800+ XFX Geforce 7800GT ABIT AN8-SLI BFG Tech 650w

Feb 18, 2006, 03:34 AM	#7
OmegaRED HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Ottawa , Canada Posts: 5,033 Rep Power: 119 System Specs	Dual core without a doubt. I've got 2 systems: 1)X2 3800@2.4ghz 9700pro 2)AMD 64 3500@2.4 x800XL The dual core system performs almost as well in games even though it has an older graphics card. The real question is what dual core cpu you will get, not if you should get one. An Opteron 165/175 is perfect for games. __________________ E Penis Specs (Upgraded!) <------------- See System Specs

Feb 18, 2006, 01:58 AM	#2
Drakon DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Floatin'... Posts: 4,957 Rep Power: 45	Well you basically answered your question in your post. Many games out now don't perform as well on a dual core as they would on a single core. The only games that utilise the 2nd core is Quake 4 and I think Call of Duty 2. If you strictly game and don't really do anything else like vid encoding, rendering/editing etc, or run multiple apps at the same time, then you're better off going the single core route. If you do those things in addition to gaming, then you can see the benefits of having the 2nd core, as it makes things run a bit smoother.

Feb 18, 2006, 02:33 AM	#4
dipstick HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: USA Posts: 3,592 Rep Power: 57 System Specs	Dual core is the way to go no matter what you do if you can afford it imho. X2's are faster than their single core brothers in everything, including gaming(4200vs3500, 4800vs4000). http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2410&p=7 Edit- photoshop should see impressive gains with X2's but im not 100% on that.

Feb 18, 2006, 05:59 PM	#8
wee017 DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Behind you. Posts: 241 Rep Power: 0	Is it worth spending 100 bucks to get the 4400 rather then the 4200?

Feb 18, 2006, 07:42 PM	#10
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,609 Rep Power: 77 System Specs	Dualcore w/o a doubt.

Feb 18, 2006, 08:24 PM	#11
Kaldar DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 213 Rep Power: 0	dualcore __________________ Operton 185 w/ Zalman CNPS9500 , Sapphire HD 4850, ABIT AT8, OC Z 700W PSU, Asus 16x DVD writer, 2GB Crucial pc3200 RAM, Xoxide X-Ventilator, WD800JDx2, MX500. 05 Mustang GT 5 Spd

Feb 18, 2006, 10:49 PM	#12
LuCifer DH sig maker! Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Compton Posts: 1,110 Rep Power: 0	Ahh.. Thanks for input Judas.. and everyone else!! __________________ [COLOR=silver] [/COLOR]