What's the point of a six core processor?

[joho128]

I was just wondering what's the point of a six core processor? Would it be better for gaming?

 

[Emperus]

There are lots of other stuff possible with a PC other than gaming. And you will be surprised to know that even the best six core processor available is actually not enough for it.

 

[joho128]

There are lots of other stuff possible with a PC other than gaming. And you will be surprised to know that even the best six core processor available is actually not enough for it.

Sorry i did not mean to insinuate that computers were only for gaming, my bad, was just looking at processors and was just wondering if a six core is actually better then a quad core.

 

[simon12]

Yes a six core is better than a quad but some uses will not be able to take advantage of it and both Intel and AMD 6 core CPUs are not worth getting for most uses.

 

[lilotimz]

For games ~ no. For professional work such as autocad 3d , design programs, music studio programs etc etc. They need as much cores as they can since those specific programs costs thousands of dollars and time is money for them. Hence they get 8 10 12 cores and more with a helluva lot more ram than probably what all of us will buy in our lifetime...

 

[jaguarskx]

Since the vast majority of games do not even use 4 cores a 6 core CPU for games would be a waste.

For the average home user, a 6 core CPU is good for those who likes to encode their movies to be stored on the hard drive. Programs like Handbrake using the x.264 codec can definitely take advantage of all 6 cores. It cuts down the time need to encode a Blu-Ray movies down to around 12GB - 15GB while still maintain very good to excellent video quality.

 

[joho128]

So if i was to buy a DIY kit from Newegg and it offered a six core for a good price is there any reason to avoid buying a six core?

 

[Emperus]

Media center and gaming PC's do not warrant anything above a quad core architecture. On the other hand, workstations can benefit from more cores depending on the software. Single user workstations thus find efficiency in going for the most number of cores available in their price bracket. Of course am not taking into account the architecture part wherein a better architecture quad core (i5 2500 for example) is faster compared to a hex core (X6 1055T for example) for say an application which does benefit from 6 or more number of cores such as 3DS Max.

 

[joho128]

Media center and gaming PC's do not warrant anything above a quad core architecture. On the other hand, workstations can benefit from more cores depending on the software. Single user workstations thus find efficiency in going for the most number of cores available in their price bracket. Of course am not taking into account the architecture part wherein a better architecture quad core (i5 2500 for example) is faster compared to a hex core (X6 1055T for example) for say an application which does benefit from 6 or more number of cores such as 3DS Max.

Funny you mention the 1055T the DIY kit i am looking at has that in it, here take a look at this,

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.638272&cm_sp=DIY_PC_Combos-_-638272-_-Combo

if i was to put a 5670 in there for light gaming use would that be a decent rig?

 

[lilotimz]

decent would be a 955BE overclocked, 4+ gigs of ram , am3+ motherboard and a GTX 460 / 560 ti or 6850 minimum.

 

[Emperus]

For gaming purposes, the AMD Phenom II X4 955 BE is the best (or balanced) processor available from AMD. The choice of video card will depend on your monitor's native resolution.

 

[bob100684]

It all depends on what you're doing with it. I went hexacore b/c I do photo and video editing, though if sandy bridge was out at the time, I might have stuck with intel.

 

[Jdmtxux]

It is for if you want to do complex stuff that is processor intense or you plan on hardcore gaming, multitasking- running lots of programs at once, etc. For average computer users who use their computer for everyday stuff quad core is probably more than enough.

 

[das_stig]

For gamers, the fastest dual/triple is more important, while more cores for designers.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

also multitasking, like those AMD Llano benchmarks vids where they are watching a movei, 3d creation, web browsing, playing a game etc etc all at the same time, not that that situation is very likely.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Im not sure of the Mobo, but Id make sure its futureproof

Also, todays results are tommorows forgotten past
Once it was, do I need a dual core, then a quad
If your intentions are to keep this rig for awhile, the longer you have it, the more useful a six core will be

 

[iam2thecrowe]

^true that, if i had spent a bit extra on a quad rather than a dual core i would not be looking to upgrade mine now. but back then more than 2 cores was useless, and most games didnt use more than 1 core.

 

[king smp]

Do you need a six core for gaming - No
will you be glad you have it a few years from now - Yes

The question is do you use computer for anything more than gaming
and internet browsing/email/social sites

If you dont then save the money on the CPU and get a better video card

I have the HD 5670 myself
for light gaming it is fine
I can play games at high settings at 1600x1200 (Crysis Warhead example)
but at higher resolutions it is very lacking

If you really like to game a good quad core like the 955 or 965
with at least a GTX 460/560 Ti or HD 6850 as another poster mentioned

I personally for myself would pick the six core because I do alot of video work
if that mobo in the build can overclock then bumping up the 1055 to over 3.0 would help it for games
but unless you are doing video/rendering work
then a quad core can handle anything you need to do

 

[tokencode]

You're better off with a quad core intel i7

 

[iam2thecrowe]

^your better off yes, if you can afford it. but a phenom 955 and motherboard to suit that is upgradeable to bulldozer is a lot cheaper and can handle anything you want to throw at it. Unless every second of your time is precious and you cant wait 20 more seconds for your DVD to rip then get the i7

 

[mdd1963]

I'd hardly call spending $120 on an unwanted CPU now with the plans of replacing it 2-3 months later with a $200-$300 cpu in the hopes that it *might* then match Intel's 2500k a cost effective solution to budget computer building...

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Nor do we know how much down the road BD will cost, and thats down the road, as Im sure itll be competitive.
As for MT, I dont think a 2500 will be in the same ballpark