Question about processors?

Question

Here are my options:

1. Intel® Core™2 Q6600 Quad-Core (8MB L2 cache,2.4GHz,1066FSB)

2. Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor E6850 (4MB L2 Cache,3.0GHz,1333 FSB)

#1 has 4 processors compared to 2 and a bigger cache

however, #2 runs at 3GHz compared to 2.4GHz, and has a higher FSB

I am looking at getting a good computer that will last 5-7 years, and be able to run any software that come sout in that time

Nothing fancy, but i want to be able to play some games, do basic pictures, and have a few thousand songs on the hard drive.

what i'm wondering about is whether or not having the faster processor at 3GHz would make that much of a difference for what I want to do

AND whether having the 4 processors compared to 2 would be better anyways

real answers only please

Answer 1

If u're gonna use it for 5-7 years I suggest yo buy the Quad one.

At the moment the Duo processors are much likely to buy cuz there is not many programs running on Quad ones right now, and this is much worse in the games zone.(only a few ones support Quad)

Actually if u want to play at the moment u need the more GHz's rather than more cores, I mean u cannot use the maximum capability of your four cores right now.but u should think of some years later and then the story would be different
I think in nearly future the Quad ones will be much efficient using concurrently 4 cores and that would multiply the process rate.

Answer 2

I have not used either CPU personally, but both should last a few years, with proper maintenance, and be able to run stuff for quite a while. I'm using a PIII 600 MHz with almost no problems. Of course, with the quad core, there are more things to go wrong. For a long time the FSB was where the bottlenecking of processors happened, but I think with over 1GHz FSB you shouldn't have to worry about this.

Answer 3

Here's the thing. In order to utilize multiple cores (be it 2, 4 or 8, or whatever) an application must be able to support parallel processing. Not many software truly supports parallel processing, as parallel processing have their own problems and limitations.

Another way of utilizing multiple cores is to actually runs multiple programs. For example, say you run Folding @Home, and you're doing video editing. the task will be distributed between 2 cpus, so both application can run without needing to wait for each other.

A 3GHz dual core, will run your photo editing faster. Games, depends on the games itself. Many games out there still doesn't utilize parallel processing, so those games will run faster on the 3GHz dual core.

But games like upcoming Alan Wake will run faster on your Quad core, even though its slower at 2.4GHz. Why? because they support up to 4 cores (some games are limited to 2 cores, yes, supporting multiple core doesn't automatically makes it support 4 cores or more). But Alan Wake is an exception because the game engine generates 5 simultanious threads (older games doesn't generate multiple threads simultaniously, thats why they don;t utilize extra cores). Alan wake can generate 5 simultanious threads, so it is one of those rare games that will run faster on a quad core.

Yeah, it's complicated, but that's just the way it is.

Maybe in the future, more application can generate multiple, parallel threads simultaniously to utilize quad core, just maybe. Remember, parallel processing has their own problem, not every software can do it.

No one can tell what happens, 5 years is a long time. But for now, the trend is towards more core, better. Next year, intel will release 8 cores CPU. That's right, 8 cores, making dual cores CPU look like ancient CPUs.

If you ask me, I will go for quad core, and try to spare as much budget as I can to get the fastest quad core CPU I can afford, since speed is important as well (as mentioned above already)

Answer 4

Uhhh... I recommend you for the second one. As in my experience, the higher FSB of processor could help the programs work properly...

Answer 5

buy the Quad one