2007-12-19 06:37:58 · 11 answers · asked by David V 6 in Computers & Internet ➔ Hardware ➔ Desktops
Note: I'm looking at the Q6600 versus the E6750
2007-12-19 06:41:53 · update #1
erm... e6600, that is.
2007-12-19 06:42:21 · update #2
It depends upon what for... most desktop applications don't benefit from having Quad Core. There are exceptions (like running 3d design software and doing heavy rendering) but usually extra RAM and a good video card make a MUCH bigger difference than Core2 Duo vs Quad.
Browsing the net, running Word & Excel, Playing Call of Duty 3 & World of Warcraft - usage like that doesn't even come close to tapping the full power of a Core 2 Duo, so having the extra power of a Quad wouldn't make any difference. Having an extra gig of RAM would... The primary benefit of Quad-Core is just future-proofing your system.
2007-12-19 07:06:36 · answer #1 · answered by Proto 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The answer so far have been on the right track. Very, very few users will see any speed increase going from 2GB to 4GB of RAM. No game will require that much. A quad-core processor from intel is basically two dual-core processors joined together. Almost all games today (though this is changing slowly) will not use more than 1 core. The second core can be used by the operating system and other programs. Unless you are running more than 2 active programs at the same time that use the processor, you will not see a speed increase going to a quad-core. Keep in mind that I'm not talking about having multiple programs open - but actually doing something. For example, converting a video, plus playing a game, plus burning a DVD, plus downloading a torrent, plus ripping songs from a CD - that kind of thing would definitely benenfit from a quad-core. However, the vast majority of us don't really have our computers doing that many things at the same time.
For most people, right now, you should get the fastest dual-core you can afford and 2GB of RAM.
2007-12-19 07:01:08 · answer #2 · answered by Christopher B 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends on clock speed.
If it was a choice between the quad core Q6600 @ 2.4 GHz and dual core E6850 @ 3.0, I would chose the second one.
If it was between the 2.4 GHz quad and a 2.4 Ghz dual core, I would get the quad.
More ram past 2 GB does not have any noticable impact. I upgraded from 1 GB of ram to 2 GB, and I see no difference.
Beyond 2 GB, you will only see a speed increase in memory-intensive applications such as Photoshop.
Update:
Between the e6600 and q6600, I would definitely get the quad core.
2007-12-19 06:41:22 · answer #3 · answered by theotherperson 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you are doing an upgrade ( as I am at the moment ), future proof yourself with Quad core, a mobo that will take 4 gig of ram and has the P35 chipset or later and be ready for 128 bit..All depends on what you do with it and how big is your bank account.. Stick with XP till the bugs are out of Vista.. Good answers by the previous guys also.
2007-12-19 07:03:27 · answer #4 · answered by elimbah44 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it relatively relies upon on what you're doing. whilst you're multitasking a TON then quad center would be greater efficient. yet greater RAM on yours will help with memory hungry purposes and assist you to run greater on the comparable time. greater then in all probability however you dont relatively want the two and additionally you in all probability purely surf the internet and play easy video games. you will possibly have offered a 5 365 days old device and seen the comparable overall performance.
2016-11-04 01:30:03 · answer #5 · answered by tegtmeier 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you need 64 bit OS to use the 4 gigs, but I say go for the quad core, you can always get more ram later, and most programs don't utilize more than 2 gigs right now.
2007-12-19 07:02:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would go with dual core and 4 g of ram.
2007-12-19 10:58:02 · answer #7 · answered by smartyboots 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I prefer a single, dedicated chip with 1 G or a dual core with 2 G.
It works great if you know how to configure it.
Just go to http://cebucustomcomputers.tripod.com and you can see how to adjust almost any computer to perform the way it is supposed to with little or no expensive components.
2007-12-19 07:51:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most systems can benefit from more RAM. Having lots of processing power won't help you if the system can't keep an atomic mass in memory to execute. However, with XP, 2GB is plenty--you can't use more than 3.5. Only a 64-bit OS can see more memory.
See http://betav.com/blog/billva/2007/12/improving_personal_computer_sy.html#more
2007-12-19 06:42:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Quad core with 2Gig Ram
2007-12-19 06:46:38 · answer #10 · answered by Legolas Greenleaf 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋