Hi Guys i have been hanging around this forums for a while reading and learning and ummm got confused terribly so i really need some professional help.First i thought to go with the q6600 get a nice Cpu cooler overclock it to 3-3.2Ghz and yey all happy ^_^ but then there is the other side saying that quad is useless (especially q6600 that its soooo old,overheting) unless you are using it for video encoding, multi tasking etc. Coz most app/games don't yet use quads rather duo's so here is my case.I am really not much of a multitasker in a way of running 20 different apps at once id rather surf the web and listen to music or just play a game or do some after effects, photoshop etc. So should i go with the quads (i can afford q6600,q8200) or i could go with the duo's (e8200,e8400,e8500),Please help me with this one and then we will see with the mother board and the rest of the components thank you.
alot of games do not support quad cores but newer games are starting to. games like call of duty world at war, far cry 2 and ut3 all make good use of quad cores. if you will not be upgrading for a while the quad core at 3.2-3.4 will last longer. if will replace the cpu after only a year then a e8400 would be a better option. but either way you go you will have good performance in current games, most games are bottlenecked by the gpu.
Originally posted by krj15489: alot of games do not support quad cores but newer games are starting to. games like call of duty world at war, far cry 2 and ut3 all make good use of quad cores. if you will not be upgrading for a while the quad core at 3.2-3.4 will last longer. if will replace the cpu after only a year then a e8400 would be a better option. but either way you go you will have good performance in current games, most games are bottlenecked by the gpu.
well then i guess i will have to go with the q6600, i am building a pc to last me 2-3 years.I am not really a frame rate fanatic so a bit lowe resolution and a bit lower details but for a longer run i guess then the q6600 is better.I really wouldn't go with the e8400 if i would need to replace it in a year but i do plan on overclocking my cpu...
I would have to side with q6600 on this. The price for the e8500 and the q6600 is about the same and you are basically getting two extra cores. Sure, you can overclock both, and the e8500 will go significantly higher, but I think that for your needs, the q6600 will do you good and last a while. You will be happy you got it later.
People have been saying that for years, it's not true. Very few games themselves can really make use of Quad cores even now. What does make use of them though, is dual graphics. If you run games with two graphics cards, I would strongly recommend a Quad core. If you don't though, Dual cores technically do the same job. However, on the same budget, a dual core you buy will only be about 30-40% faster than a quad core, so when quad cores do become more useful, a lowly Q6600 will obliterate even an overclocked E8600. Basically, it depends how long you'll keep your PC before upgrading. In the long run, a quad will work out better. If you upgrade often, it's still worth buying a dual core unless you use dual graphics.
