Quad Core or Dual Core

bigonroad

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2009
64
0
18,640
1
I'm looking to buy a new pc. I can afford a high end 3.2 core2duo, or a highish 2.6/2.8 quadcore intel

Which should I buy?

I do a LOT of multitasking; usually have at least 6 windows open: an average screen, for me has:
Dreamweaver
Fireworks
A Pdf or two
Two windows of FireFox, each with 6 tabs
Photoshop or Indesign
A few file manager windows
Foobar 2000 (a media player, playing music)
MSN
and Outlook.

And that's normal - sometimes its more.

What should I get then? Is quadcore going to sort my life. The thing is, its not like im physically using each other these programs all the time. I dont have 3 programs all rendering at once; but they are open, and will probably be doing background processes, and the like.

Also, is it worth going for 1050mhz ram, rather than 800mhz?

Looking forwards to your replies!

Bless,
Chris

________________________________________________________

please check out my medical revision website - www.MedRevise.co.uk
 

silviajdm

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2009
3
0
18,510
0
I would suggest a quad core....I running a Quad (Q6600 2.4GHZ) 64-bit system and it does wonders!

I also multitask and I have I never have an issue with slowup or lag. I also have 8GB DDR2 800MHZ that I do plan on upgrading to a 1200MHZ after I get another GPU for SLI and test some overclocking.

I only use my computer for photography, graphic design, 3DS MAX 9 & a little gaming. Also if you plan on dealing with rendering I would suggest running scratch disk, they help with performance. I have 2 500GB HDD setup as Raid 0 and 2 500 GB for boot/storage including an external 320GB HDD.

Hope this helps!
 

NuclearShadow

Distinguished
Sep 20, 2007
1,535
0
19,810
5


The Q6600 isn't better in performance however its a great bang for the buck CPU. Also it overclocks very well and is very popular to those who wish to overclock. Since you don't seem to plan on overclocking I would advise either the Q6600 or the Q9400 as their price isn't that far apart. But in my opinion the Q9550 is just isn't worth it and is literally a few dollars away from the price of a new i7 920.
 

jerreece

Splendid
Definitely a candidate for a Quad Core processor. The recommendations given above are perfect IMO. And definitely go for 4GB of RAM. Whether it's 800Mhz or 1066Mhz really isn't going to matter to you. Only reason to go for 1066Mhz is for heavy overclocking anyhow. Even then, with the Q9400 or Q6600 it isn't really needed.

Get a Quad Core, and get 4GB of GOOD 800Mhz RAM. Use the money you save on the 800Mhz RAM to put into a graphics card or something else.

Even if you don't plan to play games, put a graphics card in your computer. Don't rely on the onboard video. Having that many tasks open, and switching between screens, can slow down a bit with integrated/onboard video.
 

mamw93

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2009
540
0
18,980
0
Get a Core 2 Quad Q6600... if you want to overclock it to 3ghz (which it'll do fine with stock cooling.) The quad will really do great with all those programs running at once, after all, a quad core was meant to be used with heavy users. And as far as the ram goes 800mhz RAM will be cheaper so get that or even 667mhz and just overclock it.
 

grieve

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2004
2,709
0
20,790
4


If you can afford the Q9550, go for it, it is a great processor.

The Q6600 offers similar performance for less cash and is the better “deal” but it is not as fast.. It’s up to your wallet really.
Either way, stick with the 800 MHz ram, 4 gigs.
 

bigonroad

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2009
64
0
18,640
1
ok. what graphics card would you recommend? I think i will get 4gig ram for now, and leave two slots, then in 2 years i can get another 16gig or something lol.
I'm gonna look at motherboards now!
 

bigonroad

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2009
64
0
18,640
1
what is the best value good motherboard, that will support Q9550 or Q9400, and has support for DDR2 and DDR3, to make it a bit more future proof?
 

cjl

Splendid
I've never liked the motherboards that support both DDR2 and DDR3. Besides, with the FSB architecture, there are other bottlenecks before the memory is a problem anyways. I'd just get a DDR2 board, 2x2GB of DDR2-800, and not worry about it.
 

bigonroad

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2009
64
0
18,640
1
yeh, i think its not worth it, having looked at the differences.
So what graphics card and mother board would you recommend for the Q9550 or q9400?
 

bigonroad

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2009
64
0
18,640
1
Yeh, but none of these tests are great at looking at multitsking. As long as im using a decent os, it should be putting different applications on different cores anyway - so im less concerned about apps being thread optimised, and thus better suited to 2 cores. Ultimately, in two years a lot more is going be designed for two cores.

I think quad core is the way to go, so what graphics card and mother board would you recommend for the Q9550 or q9400?
 

fedtmusen

Distinguished
Aug 28, 2008
26
0
18,530
0
I use:
cpu:
INTEL Core2Quad Q9450 2.66 GHz LGA775 12MB Cache
Model EU80569PJ067N
OC to 3.6666 (via ntune which is included on the drivers disk to the motherboard)
Rock stable (for 3 days now) with low temps, when stock-cooler is hastily removed and another

plased instead.
-
Motherbard:
GA-EP45-UD3
Only one pci express * 16, but dont need more.
-
Ram:
corsair ddr2 1066 5-5-5-15-2.1v. 2*2 gigabyte ram
Small cooler included.
-
Cpu-cooler:
Noctua NH-U12P
Soundless.
-
Case:
antec 900
The 4 fans included are still a little noisy when set to low.
But very cool case, inside too. Can take all of the biggest coolers and VGA cards.
-
Powersupply:
Corsair HX520W (modular, because not much space in the antec 900 for cords and the like)
More or less soundless.
-
Gpu:
VGA PCI-E 512 MB RADEON HD 4850 GAINWARD GOLDEN SAMPLE.
-
Harddisk:
WD Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640 GB with 32 mb cache.
Fast and nearly soundless
-
Os:
wista ultimate 64 bit
---
I can recommend the above mentioned system to people who use Photoshop, Dreamweaver, CaD and the

like.
"Multitasking" is not a problem! Photoshop cs3 is up, under 2 seconds...
-
This is a costly system, because I live in Denmark....
with naked icebears walking the streets ;-}
I started to get the stuff together last year, and finished/assempled 3 days ago.
-
As you, i was reading a lot in the forums.
Advices needed are given her.
Have happy days
 

mamw93

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2009
540
0
18,980
0
With the new archetechture out the Dual Core is becoming an ancient artifact... go Quad to get the most life out of your processor.
 
Quad. Most benchmarks out there will show less FPS on a Duo using todays best GFX cards. For most high end GFX solutions (GTX 260 216 or higher), Duos are CPU limiting the rest of the system.

Unless not building a gaming rig, there is almost no point for a Duo now that Quads are less then $200.
 

Kraynor

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2007
829
0
19,010
5
Since you're not overclocking Q9450. 9550 is priced too close to an i7 to really make it worth getting instead of building an i7 rig, and the performance isn't that different between the 9450 and 9550.
 

TRENDING THREADS