Quad or dual?

[kaid]

a Quad processor are really more faster then a dual processor even the speed of the dual processor are higher?

exemple: Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.40GHz and Intel Core2 Duo E6850 @ 3.00GHz

[David (PassMark)]

It really depends on the applcation and if the application runs in multiple threads.

If most of your applications are single threaded (e.g. old games) then go for fewer cores and higher clock speed.

If you use many applications at the same time or are using newer games, or have a server that many people share (eg a web server) the quad is probably better.

[Leo Brennan]

go for one of the quads....... you'll be better set up as newer programs begin making use of them. call it future-proof or future-ready; in any case, you'll be better off with a quad i think. I know i am.

-Leo

[CiD]

depends on disposable income at the moment...you can either upgrade twice, once now, then once in 1.5 - 2 years, or once now at top dollar...3000 nuts out now or like 3500 spread out over 2 systems as prices drop

[merlin]

Faster

I have a Q6600 that is overclocked to 3.00GHz same as the E6850.

The quad core Q6600 is not really any faster than the e6850 when it comes down to running the same threads two as opposed to four.

If I set Performance Test to run only two threads the same that the E6850 can run because it is Dual core, my overclocked Quad is no faster it gets 1781 on the CPU mark.

But my Quad can run 4 threads at the same time and gets a 3390 on the CPUmark.

Games such as Crysis and I think COD4 are starting to use multiple cores to process game Physics, I say be Future proof and go with the Quad core as it is near the same cost as the E6850.

Merlin