Slinky Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 dude, who cares if programs like games dont support quad right now. this is a absolute no brainer i would get the quad on any day of the week. i have read hundreds and hundreds of reviews like the post above mine from kbreudi saying that they overclocked the shit outta that thing and it still doesnt get too hot. this decision is simple. Quote DD M4 Rockford Fosgate P500-4 SoundQubed HDC415 w carbon fiber cap 2 Rockford Fosagate T1675-S XS Power D3400 Under Hood XS Power D5100 in rear Michael Singer 200A Alt Build Log: http://www.stevemeadedesigns.com/board/topic/153901-2012-veloster-update-842013-wall-build-4-15s/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 dual core x2. it'll be more than enough to run anything you need. and when it comes to games...last i heard i think half life 2 was the only game that utilized all 4 cores. so you'd get better performance out of the duo compared to the quad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 (edited) dude, who cares if programs like games dont support quad right now. this is a absolute no brainer i would get the quad on any day of the week. i have read hundreds and hundreds of reviews like the post above mine from kbreudi saying that they overclocked the shit outta that thing and it still doesnt get too hot. this decision is simple. it's not as easy as plugging the chip in and overclocking it tho and have everything run perfectly. and by the time quad cores become more important with use...they'll be much cheaper most likely. and more advanced. especially with newer chips coming out. not saying they're bad...just saying i'd rather spend less now and get more performance. can always sell the chip later...or end up sellin the whole PC and upgrading to one with quad core when need be. but he'd be set for a while with the duo Edited March 20, 2008 by ExpoSport Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sp33dyG Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 id go with the quad core for future use yea the dual core might be faster for gaming and all but with the quad core u can do more than u can with the dual core and the quad core is a decent processor for gaming he said hes not a big pc gamer if he was then yea go with the dual core but since hes not a big pc gamer and hes jus using his pc for media n stuff id go with the quad core Quote the only person i wouldnt let build my box would be Ray. Team Heavy-Flex4 SA 12's tuned to 29hz Ampere Audio 3800.1 @ 1 ohmXS Power D3100Big 3Stock alt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gq85 Posted March 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 Yeah, I'm sticking with the dual core. This computer is not intended for PC gaming really. I do most of my gaming on my 360 but I still want a pretty decent computer. I already have everything with the exception of the processor. Nothing special but I'll try to get some pics and show my build as I get started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gq85 Posted March 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 id go with the quad core for future use yea the dual core might be faster for gaming and all but with the quad core u can do more than u can with the dual core and the quad core is a decent processor for gaming he said hes not a big pc gamer if he was then yea go with the dual core but since hes not a big pc gamer and hes jus using his pc for media n stuff id go with the quad core From my understanding after doing a bit of reading quad is intended more for gaming, and multi tasking applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumassjeff Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 (edited) *cough cough* six core *cough cough* Ive had my amd 6000+ 3.0 for a few months now and its been rock solid though everything i could throw at it. I dont got much to say about Intel since im not a user of them but i say go dual! Edited March 20, 2008 by bumassjeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gq85 Posted March 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 *cough cough* six core *cough cough* Ive had my amd 6000+ 3.0 for a few months now and its been rock solid though everything i could throw at it. I dont got much to say about Intel since im not a user of them but i say go dual! lol. I wasn't aware Intel was coming out with a six core. That's awesome. That six core I imagine would be way out of my budget though. I thought about giving AMD a try but decided to go with Intel. Maybe next time I'll give AMD a try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 lol. I wasn't aware Intel was coming out with a six core. That's awesome. That six core I imagine would be way out of my budget though. I thought about giving AMD a try but decided to go with Intel. Maybe next time I'll give AMD a try. chips like these are what'll make dual/quad chips cheaper yay for ever increasing technology Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razor5070 Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 I havent noticed a single difference in proformance from the dual to the quad. There both Screaming fast.. Either will do. I would say go dual core. More support for it. I would deffinatly rather program for a dual core, than a quad.. that's x2 more threads! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.