Quad or Dual cores? Intel or AMD?

[Lucifiel]

*sighs* Just when I'd nearly finalised my build, I find out that though many programs are still single-core/dual-core for now, more will be going quad in the future.

I think I might've got really confused after reading up so much about computers.

So, what are your recommendations? Go Core 2 Duo? Or settle for the Phenom II by AMD so I can upgrade piece by piece? Core i7 looks awesome though it's far beyond my budget.

I will playing only some games(non-FPS) once in a while, using mainly the pc for music, Microsoft Office, websurfing, watching movies, etc. No intentions for programming.

[rudihawk]

Stick with a okish Core2 Duo for now, until you really need to upgrade to quadcore.

[nhasian]

maybe the Core i7 CPU & MB will be cheaper after thanksgiving? right now its about $200 for an MSI motherboard and about $300 for the Intel Core i7 920 2.66GHz. At least the 3 Gigs of triple channel memory is only $100.

[mbsullivan]

The best CPU will depend really on you, and what your needs for a computer are.

will playing only some games(non-FPS) once in a while

FPSs really are the only games that stress a system to the max, and will benefit from a GPU upgrade more than an expensive CPU, anyway.

using mainly the pc for music

Audio compression times scale almost linearly with number of cores, so if you do a lot of audio or video compression, this is one area that a quad core will excel.

Microsoft Office, websurfing, watching movies, etc.

It sounds like you really don't need the added compute power offered by a quad core CPU. A dual core CPU will consume less power (saving a significant amount of money if you leave your computer on all the time).

Mike

[Lucifiel]

Stick with a okish Core2 Duo for now, until you really need to upgrade to quadcore.

So, I will possibly have to get quadcore in the future, eh?

maybe the Core i7 CPU & MB will be cheaper after thanksgiving? right now its about $200 for an MSI motherboard and about $300 for the Intel Core i7 920 2.66GHz. At least the 3 Gigs of triple channel memory is only $100.

Not in my country. Prices are a bit too high here atm: at least $200 to $300 for DDr3 ram.

The best CPU will depend really on you, and what your needs for a computer are.

So not even if I plan a bit into the future, eh? I'm guessing this rig will last 2 to 3 years max at the rate technology is moving.

FPSs really are the only games that stress a system to the max, and will benefit from a GPU upgrade more than an expensive CPU, anyway.

You're right about that. In fact, all those newer games seem to be going down path. Good CPu needed? Yes. Most powerful CPU? Not always.

No, scratch that "newer games" and replace it with "programs".

Audio compression times scale almost linearly with number of cores, so if you do a lot of audio or video compression, this is one area that a quad core will excel.

Ah, I see.

It sounds like you really don't need the added compute power offered by a quad core CPU. A dual core CPU will consume less power (saving a significant amount of money if you leave your computer on all the time).

Mike

Good points, there.


Thanks everyone. That seems to about cover it.

[davidsrsb]

A dual 3Ghz will run most programs faster than a quad 2GHz.
Duals do feel much more responsive than singles, even very fast chips as a process can easily block another

At this time a fast dual core gives the best perfomance for price and will leave something for a reasonable graphics card

[HavocXphere]

I'd go with an Intel. Maybe an E8400 or something along those lines if you want a dual-core.

Dual core --> More overclocking potential, less heat
Quad core --> Not fully utilized atm, but that will change

Usually a high-end dual will outperform a quad (ignoring i7) in game benchmarks.

Stay away from ddr3...its *very* expensive and the performance boost is not that big. Rather buy more ddr2.

If I had to buy now then I'd go for a Quad because I think thats the way everything is heading. Either that or delay till a low-end i7 is within reach.