Author Topic: Dual-Core CPU's (Read 3082 times)

zx2slow · « **on:** March 21, 2006, 04:27:15 PM »

Are they worth getting? Is there any software that will even utilize the second core?

The Nstuff · « **Reply #1 on:** March 21, 2006, 06:09:04 PM »

my next rig (after vista ships and dx10 vid cards are out) will most definitely be dualcore. Techreport.com always talks about the 'creamy smoothness' of running a dualcore system. Unfortunately, I don't have much experience with them other than what i've read.

TekieB · « **Reply #2 on:** March 21, 2006, 06:21:46 PM »

Dualcore is amazing for non gaming use (photoshop, etc), and heavyduty multitasking.

Most games aren't coded to utilize smp, many pro apps are.

sully! · « **Reply #3 on:** March 21, 2006, 07:50:32 PM »

Regardless, you won't see too many single core CPU's before too long as the industry moves towards dual and eventually quad core designs.

As this becomes the de facto standard, software will begin to take advantage of it. They haven't in the past because not many people had smp capable systems. That is all changing now.

Dwg115 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 21, 2006, 08:58:33 PM »

Quake 4 has support for dual core and it bumps the fps up pretty good. like 20% or something aorund there. Call of duty2 has support but the performance isnt nearly as jawdropping.

I think these next few cpu releases from AMD and intel are really going to up the ante. read some intel conroe previews if you don't believe me.

Xiphias · « **Reply #5 on:** March 22, 2006, 05:29:10 AM »

AMD is acutally working on quad cores I think.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1826663,00.asp

Mr.Tibbs · « **Reply #6 on:** March 22, 2006, 06:01:06 AM »

That really doesn't surprise me at all, I mean AMD kicks total ass to begin with. I got a AMD 64 4000+ San Diego core and I love it.

The Shoctor · « **Reply #7 on:** March 22, 2006, 07:19:10 AM »

I have noticed on slower clocked dual core machines (compared to faster single core) that windows seems to be slightly more responsive.

Mr.Tibbs · « **Reply #8 on:** March 22, 2006, 03:13:14 PM »

Quote from: "ShadoHawk"

I have noticed on slower clocked dual core machines (compared to faster single core) that windows seems to be slightly more responsive.

And by slightly more responsive you mean you can't tell a damn difference. :bigsmile:

TekieB · « **Reply #9 on:** March 22, 2006, 08:25:19 PM »

My SMP machine OWNS all

(as do the apple quad cored :D)

sully! · « **Reply #10 on:** March 23, 2006, 11:04:39 PM »

Some good points are brought up here:

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/23/2339253&from=rss

The Shoctor · « **Reply #11 on:** March 24, 2006, 07:55:14 AM »

Quote from: "tiburonlover"

Quote from: "ShadoHawk"
I have noticed on slower clocked dual core machines (compared to faster single core) that windows seems to be slightly more responsive.

And by slightly more responsive you mean you can't tell a damn difference. :bigsmile:

If I couldn't notice a difference I wouldn't have said anything.

zx2slow · « **Reply #12 on:** March 25, 2006, 08:57:22 AM »

I'm sticking with a faster single core rather than t slower cores,

Dwg115 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 25, 2006, 09:15:05 AM »

I think it's still a bit early to be buying dual core stuff but it won't be too much longer till a lot of software is written for it. Maybe server apps are the exception. maybe they can utilize the dual cores already?
Personally, I can't wait to see Intel and AMD duke it out for Dual core supremacy!

zx2slow · « **Reply #14 on:** March 25, 2006, 09:44:21 AM »

CoreDuo AKA conroe, If intels benches were fair then AMD has already lost. I'll still stick with AMD because their bang for the buck cant be beat.

Author Topic: Dual-Core CPU's (Read 3082 times)

TekieB

Xiphias

TekieB