|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 81
|
Going to build a new PC, should i go for dual-core or not?
Ive been looking at AMD processors, ive narrowed it down to either the 4000+ single-core, or the 4200+ dual-core CPU, what are the real benefits of either? I will probably be using my PC for games, and nothing else too strenous, just internet browsing and mp3 ripping etc. Is the 4200+ actually more powerful for playing games, or just multi-tasking? Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Computing Professor
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,718
|
It looks like the "it'll be years before games use a dual core processor" line isn't true.
Go for the 4200.
__________________
Asus M4A77D, 64 X2 6000+, 4 GB Corsair DDR2 800 ram, Radeon 5770. Last edited by pam123; 03-10-2006 at 03:43 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Premium Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,616
|
If your budget is big enough to be looking at the higher end CPUs, go with the duel core. Some of the latest games are already starting to support duel core processing. Even a week or two ago people where still going back and forth on this, but it has been stated that games are already going to be supporting duel core CPUs, the one everyone stateing being Elder Scrolls: Oblivion.
__________________
Laptop HP DM4t / i5-560M / 14.1 WXGA Widescreen / 1GB Radeon Mobility 6370 / 4GB RAM / 320 GB 7200rpm HD / DVD-RW / 802.11n & BT wireless First Build Abit IC7-G Max II Motherboard / 2.8C 800mhz P4 / 1024 DDR 3200 (2x 512 in Duel Channel) / Saphire Radeon 9800 Pro 128 / Samsung 120 GB SATA HD / Lite-On 16x DVD-ROM / NEC DVD-RW |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 81
|
Thanks for the replies, i will definately go for dual core if Oblivion supports it, as that game is the root of my decision for building myself a new PC. The price difference between the two is only about £15, i just wanted to make sure there were no major differences. Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | ||
|
Member (9 bit)
|
Hello:
Go for the X2 you won't regret it. All of the people I've talked with that game and own an X2 love the X2. I've personally played WoW and some other games on the X2 while burning cd's and other tasks, and I have to say it was a very good experience. The X2 does make sense, and I'm glad it was released. I've got my own new system (using a dual core chip) on the way, which I hope to have up and running very soon. Klutz
__________________
Pray for the troops, my brother: SPC. Nathan Hillaker HHS 1-182 FA SECFOR Acting Armorer "Rocket Cops"
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 136
|
I agree, dual core is definately the way to go if you want your computer to still be fast a year from now... it's a great investment cause support for dual core is going to rise pretty fast from now on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member (3 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7
|
does it take much more experience to build a duel core than a single?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Premium Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,616
|
Doesn't take any more skill. Once you know what you're doing, dropping a processor into the socket is dropping a processor into the socket, no matter how powerful the thing happens to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 34
|
I agree with the dual-core system.
I'm going to pass on some of the advice given to me a couple weeks ago. Get the 4400+ (Toledo core) if you can afford it. If you're going with a Manchester core, just get the 3800+ and put the extra money towards more RAM or a better graphics card. The difference between a 3800 & a 4000 is negligible, and when the prices on the Toledo-core chips (or the FX chips) drop, you can upgrade to something that will give you a noticable performance gain. Just my $0.02. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|