What Intel Processor to buy

[purecomedy]

In light of my current computer problems I'm beginning to wonder if I should buy a new PC.

1. What is the best bang for buck the Intel Core 2 Duo vs. Quad.
2. I thought that I read a few things that the new processors aren't that much faster than P4s when doing only 1 task...they excel at multiprocessing. Just wondering if anyone has an opinion if it is worth upgrading from a P4 2.8C at this time. I'm assuming the new CPUs are quite a bit faster, at least in the machine I built for my parents it appears to be the case.

Thanks.

[Hollowtips]

ultimately, quad will be faster then core 2 duo for obvious reasons, but technically i'm not sure.

[Joel]

We just upgraded one of our secretary computers from a P4 2.8GHz C core to an E6300 (which we overclocked to 2.8GHz out of the box, with stock cooling and stock voltage). The speed difference is absolutely amazing. Even at stock speeds it's still very noticeably faster.

Quad Core vs Dual Core.. Technically they are faster as their potential for how many cycles they can do at at a time, added together, would faster than their dual or single core counterparts. That said, a dual core does not have any problem multitasking and on most currently and near future software titles (certain games aside). One thing to keep in mind is that an equally clocked Quad core will cost the same as a higher clocked Dual core. In some games for example, this gives the dual core the advantage where the game engine can not process with more than one or two cores as the dual core is clocked higher. Dual cores also have higher overclocking potential and put out next heat. Again though, Quad cores are technically faster.

The best bang for your buck currently I would say is either
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115030
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115029

The Q6600 is also a good deal if you are looking to go the quad core route.

[joecool169]

We just upgraded one of our secretary computers from a P4 2.8GHz C core to an E6300 (which we overclocked to 2.8GHz out of the box, with stock cooling and stock voltage). The speed difference is absolutely amazing. Even at stock speeds it's still very noticeably faster.

Quad Core vs Dual Core.. Technically they are faster as their potential for how many cycles they can do at at a time, added together, would faster than their dual or single core counterparts. That said, a dual core does not have any problem multitasking and on most currently and near future software titles (certain games aside). One thing to keep in mind is that an equally clocked Quad core will cost the same as a higher clocked Dual core. In some games for example, this gives the dual core the advantage where the game engine can not process with more than one or two cores as the dual core is clocked higher. Dual cores also have higher overclocking potential and put out next heat. Again though, Quad cores are technically faster.

The best bang for your buck currently I would say is either
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115030
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115029

The Q6600 is also a good deal if you are looking to go the quad core route.

Very well put. And I might just add that the quads also overclock quite well if you go that route. The quads do however generate more heat. I am very happy with my quad core, and it pumps out some very good F@h numbers.

[illestdynasty]

In all honesty the quads and the duo should perform the same if they are clocked at the same speed, only difference is the quad will let u do twice the work at the same time as the duo cuz the quad cores are really just two core 2 duos placed on the same die. However the higher clocked chip would outperform period

[Brk]

In all honesty the quads and the duo should perform the same if they are clocked at the same speed, only difference is the quad will let u do twice the work at the same time as the duo cuz the quad cores are really just two core 2 duos placed on the same die. However the higher clocked chip would outperform period

[Brk]

Unless you use programs that are multi-threaded, it doesn't really matter anyway. A basic Core 2 Duo will be fine. Just pick whatever GHz you want. Don't get caught up on cores and caches and all that noise.

[purecomedy]

Unless you use programs that are multi-threaded, it doesn't really matter anyway. A basic Core 2 Duo will be fine. Just pick whatever GHz you want. Don't get caught up on cores and caches and all that noise.

I guess that is the issue, how do I know in the next 12 months how many programs would take advantage of the fact that there are 4 processors vs. 2 processors to do work...

Anyway, thank you all for the information. The answers were in line with what I was expecting.

[mnosteele52]

You should definitely go with a dual core, that's a no brainer but it makes a big difference in the L1 & L2 cache, the more the better, the faster things will run.