Dual vs Quad

[Gosport]

AMD Phenom II X2 545 Callisto 3.0GHz 2 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 80W Dual-Core Processor - $92


vs

AMD Phenom 9650 2.3GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 2MB L3 Cache Socket AM2+ 95W Quad-Core Processor - $109


I just want Ubuntu to boot fast and run/ load FireFox, Gimp, and Picasa quickly. My budget is less than $450.


Other hardware I am looking at:

GIGABYTE GA-MA785G-UD3H AM3/AM2+/AM2 AMD 785G HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128395)

Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319)

G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model F2-6400CL5D-4GBPQ - Retail (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122)

[JillSwift]

I'd go with the phenom II X2. For what you say you wish to run on it, it will give you really good performance. Most programs don't make use of the multiple cores unless compiled for it, so unless you're going to be doing a lot of heavy data processing (like video conversion) a dual core will happily run your applications for you with horsepower ready to go when the OS does its stuff, or when you have several apps going.

Besides, I hear the original Phenoms have heat problems. Not sure about that, though.

[norm7446]

Afraid to say it all depends on the software writers. If they write efficient programs that run more that one thread at a time then and only then will a Dual or a Quad core processor start to work at it's full potential. That is now even taking into effect if you are going to put 32bit software on to this system. As then the processor is only emulating 32bit and not it's natural habitat of 64bit.

Sorry for the negative thoughts, man. But on a lighter note, I would go for the Quad as there is not that much more cost between the two.

[Blacklightbulb]

I heard a bit of a bad reputation regarding Phenom (I). Besides with the right MOBO and BIOS you could unlock to two lock cores of that Phenom II into a quad core.

[NormanFLinux]

Buy dual core and save yourself the cash. There are few applications that run on four cores. Most people don't need the extra computing horsepower - but if you're into serious gaming, that might be a reason to get a quad core PC instead.

[Blacklightbulb]

Buy dual core and save yourself the cash. There are few applications that run on four cores. Most people don't need the extra computing horsepower - but if you're into serious gaming, that might be a reason to get a quad core PC instead.

? computing-power?

[hessiess]

Buy dual core and save yourself the cash. There are few applications that run on four cores. Most people don't need the extra computing horsepower - but if you're into serious gaming, that might be a reason to get a quad core PC instead.

^This, modern computers are massively overpowered anyway and verry few applications can take advantage of a dual core CPU, let alone a quad, games included. Prittymuch the only thing I know of which can use 4 and more cores are raytracers.

[Game_boy]

Neither. Propus quad-core, $99. Better performance of Phenom II with four cores of the other one.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103706&cm_re=propus-_-19-103-706-_-Product

[Simian Man]

I agree, go with the dual-core. "Multi-Core" is a marketing term until application developers and/or compiler writers actually make use of them.

[forrestcupp]

If you're running mostly single threaded apps, a 3.0 GHz dual core will beat the pants off of a 2.3 GHz quad core because you're only using 1 of the cores. The only things more cores will help with are multi-threaded apps, and if you're running a heck of a lot of apps all at once.

[Gosport]

What about the specific applications I run: Ubuntu, Firefox, Picasa, Gimp and also online video.

I like the Athlon II suggestion. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-706-_-Product (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103706&cm_re=propus-_-19-103-706-_-Product)

[Skripka]

What about the specific applications I run: Ubuntu, Firefox, Picasa, Gimp and also online video.

I like the Athlon II suggestion. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-706-_-Product (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103706&cm_re=propus-_-19-103-706-_-Product)

The reason that CPU is so cheap is because it has NO L3 cache at all.

[khelben1979]

If you're running mostly single threaded apps, a 3.0 GHz dual core will beat the pants off of a 2.3 GHz quad core because you're only using 1 of the cores. The only things more cores will help with are multi-threaded apps, and if you're running a heck of a lot of apps all at once.

Quad core might not be the best alternative today, but if he intends to keep it for the coming 10 years, then quad core is the way to go. Cheap quad cores has arrived to the market and I would recommend this review (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3638) from AnandTech.

I myself bought my Pentium 4 processor 7 years ago in november and I might do the same once I go over to quad cores when I do (or if I get something better, you never know..)

[Gosport]

The reason that CPU is so cheap is because it has NO L3 cache at all.

Dose that matter so much if I'm not a gamer?

Check out these benchmarks from PasMark:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Athlon+II+X4+620
and
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X2+545

[NormanFLinux]

If you're not a gamer, it hardly matters. Buy what serves you now. You can upgrade when the software catches up to the hardware. In Windows 7, Microsoft is AFAIK, not imposing hefty new requirements to run it.

[earthpigg]

maybe a bit off topic,

your computer will only move as fast as the slowest part of whatever you are trying to do.


Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM

have you considered as solid state drive?

i am very happy with my decision to use this 60gb ssd as my primary internal hard drive - even if it is a 2.5" laptop hard drive duct taped to the inside of my case.

(no moving parts = really no reason to bother mounting it firmly.)

[Gosport]

maybe a bit off topic,

your computer will only move as fast as the slowest part of whatever you are trying to do.



have you considered as solid state drive?

i am very happy with my decision to use this 60gb ssd as my primary internal hard drive - even if it is a 2.5" laptop hard drive duct taped to the inside of my case.

(no moving parts = really no reason to bother mounting it firmly.)

This is not "off topic" at all. I am looking for the best system, for me, overall (though you are pushing me out of my budget). Thank you for the suggestion.

[YeOK]

I would advise you to go for a quad core Phenom II. Quad cores are better at multitasking, regardless of how well an application is written to support it. Linux has very good SMP support. Having X-org, compiz-fusion, Firefox and the gimp each running on its own core at the same time is going to give a much more responsive desktop experience than the extra few Mhz of similar priced Dual core.

I would avoid getting anything older than a Phenom II though.


maybe a bit off topic,

your computer will only move as fast as the slowest part of whatever you are trying to do.



have you considered as solid state drive?

i am very happy with my decision to use this 60gb ssd as my primary internal hard drive - even if it is a 2.5" laptop hard drive duct taped to the inside of my case.

(no moving parts = really no reason to bother mounting it firmly.)

I'm also happy with my SSD, however, I didn't bother with the duck tape. :)

[Gosport]

This is my shopping list so far:



http://c1.neweggimages.com/ProductImageCompressAll/27-151-187-02.jpg
SAMSUNG Black 22X DVD Burner Black SATA Model SH-S223B - OEM (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151187) Item #: N82E16827151187
$27.99

http://c1.neweggimages.com/ProductImageCompressAll/11-153-027-13.jpg
Foxconn TLA-436-2CA400 Black/ Silver Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 235W Power Supply - Retail (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811153027) Item #: N82E16811153027
$44.99

http://c1.neweggimages.com/ProductImageCompressAll/22-136-319-03.jpg
Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319) Item #: N82E16822136319
$74.99
http://c1.neweggimages.com/ProductImageCompressAll/23-126-013-03.jpg
Logitech Deluxe 250 Black USB Wired Standard Keyboard - OEM (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16823126013) Item #: N82E16823126013
$12.99

http://c1.neweggimages.com/ProductImageCompressAll/20-231-122-12.jpg
G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model F2-6400CL5D-4GBPQ - Retail (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122) Item #: N82E16820231122
$64.99

http://c1.neweggimages.com/ProductImageCompressAll/19-103-706-03.jpghttp://c1.neweggimages.com/ProductImageCompressAll/13-135-235-02.jpg


AMD Athlon II X4 620 Propus 2.6GHz Socket AM3 95W Quad-Core Processor Model ADX620WFGIBOX - Retail (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.262206) Item #: N82E16819103706Return Policy: CPU Replacement Only Return Policy (http://www.newegg.com/HelpInfo/ReturnPolicy.aspx#39)
ECS A780GM-A Ultra AM2+/AM3 AMD 780G HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.262206) Item #: N82E16813135235

-$20.00 Combo
$19.00 Mail-in Rebate13-135-235 (http://images10.newegg.com/uploadfilesfornewegg/rebate/SH/ECS22MIRsSep16Sep3009lt12.pdf)
$153.99

Subtotal: $379.94

[raymondh]

I'd go with the quad .... because of the small price delta and the "expansion"possibilities (as your computing grows). Also, I would look at a faster HD.

[Gosport]

(http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103675&cm_re=phenom_ii-_-19-103-675-_-Product)

[Gosport]

I would advise you to go for a quad core Phenom II. Quad cores are better at multitasking, regardless of how well an application is written to support it. Linux has very good SMP support. Having X-org, compiz-fusion, Firefox and the gimp each running on its own core at the same time is going to give a much more responsive desktop experience than the extra few Mhz of similar priced Dual core.

I would avoid getting anything older than a Phenom II though.



I'm also happy with my SSD, however, I didn't bother with the duck tape. :)



That model is $169.99, a bit pricier than I want:

AMD Phenom II X4 945 Deneb 3.0GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor Model (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103675&cm_re=phenom_ii-_-19-103-675-_-Product)

[YeOK]

That model is $169.99, a bit pricier than I want:

AMD Phenom II X4 945 Deneb 3.0GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor Model (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103675&cm_re=phenom_ii-_-19-103-675-_-Product)

Sorry, I meant the Phenom I Quad core you linked in your first post. The Athlon II Quad Core is a good choice.

[hessiess]

I agree, go with the dual-core. "Multi-Core" is a marketing term until application developers and/or compiler writers actually make use of them.

Compilers cannot automatically create threaded code unless the language is pure, i.e. has no side effects. I don't see every single programmer switching to a pure language like Haskell any time soon.

[Simian Man]

Compilers cannot automatically create threaded code unless the language is pure, i.e. has no side effects. I don't see every single programmer switching to a pure language like Haskell any time soon.

There is actually quite a lot of research going into automatic parallelization of non-pure code, but such techniques aren't going to be commonplace for a while. There are also other programming systems that are unpure, like Erlang, but offer more support for simple concurrency than traditional languages. I think that the concurrent programming paradigm will become commonplace over the next few decades but not with languages like Haskell because, as you alluded to, not many programmers want to use a language like that :).

[toupeiro]

I'd go with the quad as well. More is multi-threaded today than people realize. Sure, not everything is, but parallelism is also becoming easier and easier to implement. Better to have the hardware available enable performance through the life of your PC than not, even if its not fully realized on day 0.

Seriously though, a SSD will yield a much more noticeable performance boost for the money.

[Dimitriid]

You haven't put the most important part of your build on the list: The power supply. I strongly suggest to go for a very good power supply since that is "very much common mistake!" to be quite honest.

I suggest you would at least look into an Antec 500Watts.

EDIT: The case includes a PSU but 235 watts its a little low and might prove massively insufficient for any future video card update. Also I don't know how reputable is that particular brand for PSU but is not a brand I ever hear as recommended.

[Skripka]

You haven't put the most important part of your build on the list: The power supply. I strongly suggest to go for a very good power supply since that is "very much common mistake!" to be quite honest.

I suggest you would at least look into an Antec 500Watts.

EDIT: The case includes a PSU but 235 watts its a little low and might prove massively insufficient for any future video card update. Also I don't know how reputable is that particular brand for PSU but is not a brand I ever hear as recommended.

Yep, I wouldn't even bother with a major-brand PSU less than 500W. It is EASY on a current gen dual/tri/quad core CPU system to pull 300W at load.

[Dimitriid]

I am running a Corsair 650watt PSU but if I decide to upgrade to anything more than my current geforce 260 I will probably need to get a 700 or 800 watt model.

Getting back to topic that processor alone is ranked at 95w ( I think that would be peak but still ). Processor alone could be pulling as much as 40% of the max capability of that PSU and that if the psu is to be trusted: most less-than-stellar brands have so many spikes you really can't trust the numbers they advertise anyways.

[Skripka]

I am running a Corsair 650watt PSU but if I decide to upgrade to anything more than my current geforce 260 I will probably need to get a 700 or 800 watt model.

Getting back to topic that processor alone is ranked at 95w ( I think that would be peak but still ). Processor alone could be pulling as much as 40% of the max capability of that PSU and that if the psu is to be trusted: most less-than-stellar brands have so many spikes you really can't trust the numbers they advertise anyways.

The "95W" attached to a CPU name is only a thermal specification (TDP)-it does not define electrical load. It can imply it, but only imply it.

Wattage numbers don't tell you much on PSUs anyway-you have to look at the number and kind of rails, as well as their max amperage to know if you are in fact "upgrading".

[Dimitriid]

The "95W" attached to a CPU name is only a thermal specification (TDP)-it does not define electrical load. It can imply it, but only imply it.

Wattage numbers don't tell you much on PSUs anyway-you have to look at the number and kind of rails, as well as their max amperage to know if you are in fact "upgrading".

You're right on both accounts I think.

[earthpigg]

may i suggest abandoning the optical drive and spending the money saved on a ssd?

i nearly purchased a dvd drive myself, then realized.... i havent used the optical drive on my old computer in forever!

i am an advocate of this:

one optical drive per household.... for that rare occassion that you want to play a DVD or some distant family member gives you a "Picture CD" from wallmart.

[3rdalbum]

one optical drive per household.... for that rare occassion that you want to play a DVD or some distant family member gives you a "Picture CD" from wallmart.

Don't come to my house, you'd faint. I have two DVD burners in my desktop, two in my father's desktop, and one in my server. I use most of them.

PS: Unless you're going to be doing a LOT of video encoding to H.264, buy a dual-core.

I'm putting all my DVDs into H.264 format on my server, which is why I'm using all those DVD drives, and why I wish I had a quad-core now (x264 supports multi-core encoding).

[hessiess]

^ Why not just store it on HDDs?


may i suggest abandoning the optical drive and spending the money saved on a ssd?

i nearly purchased a dvd drive myself, then realized.... i havent used the optical drive on my old computer in forever!

i am an advocate of this:

one optical drive per household.... for that rare occassion that you want to play a DVD or some distant family member gives you a "Picture CD" from wallmart.

Agree, optical drives are basically obsolite.



There is actually quite a lot of research going into automatic parallelization of non-pure code, but such techniques aren't going to be commonplace for a while. There are also other programming systems that are unpure, like Erlang, but offer more support for simple concurrency than traditional languages. I think that the concurrent programming paradigm will become commonplace over the next few decades but not with languages like Haskell because, as you alluded to, not many programmers want to use a language like that .


Where is this research that you speck of, a google search dident tern up anything.

[bruno9779]

quad core is AM2 while dual core is AM3
my money is on AM3.
and maybe you could consider getting what I have : PhenomII X3 blackedition. Really a good buy (I haven't managed to overheat it, and albeit! I tried!!)

[Simian Man]

Where is this research that you speck of, a google search dident tern up anything.

Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=automatic+parallelization+compiler) turns up a few. I attended a talk on this subject a while ago and considered it as a research area.

[iQuizzle]

I currently have a e5400/g43 setup. I am horribly disappointed with the performance of the g43 in linux (can't even playback smooth video). I think it might be a somewhat faulty chip though, as I can't even get the dvi port to work. I have to use the vga output.

I was thinking about moving over to a AMD X4 620/785g setup as well. It seems like a steal @~$170 for me because I don't game and I don't want to run/buy a separate graphics card.

Just curious about the SSDs. I started watching their performance about 2 years ago, but they were way too expensive at the time. It seems that you can get a reasonable 64GB SSD for around $180 now. Which ones have you guys purchased? How relevant is the read/write speed? Is it critical to spend more and get the 220MB/s drives or are the 170MB/s drives fine?

I was thinking that the most critical thing was the access times, but I wasn't completely sure.

[khelben1979]

quad core is AM2 while dual core is AM3

Don't you mean the opposite? AM3 is newer than AM2..

[MaxIBoy]

Don't you mean the opposite? AM3 is newer than AM2..



AM2 supported dual-core processors and uniprocessors only.
AM2+ was backwards compatible with AM2 but also supported quad-core and tri-core processors (i.e. the original Phenom series.)
AM3 has quad-core support (Phenom II X4,) tri-core support (Phenom II x3,) and dual-core support (Athlon II.) I suppose it could support uniprocessors as well, but honestly, is anyone even making them anymore?

[Exodist]

I'd go with the phenom II X2. For what you say you wish to run on it, it will give you really good performance. Most programs don't make use of the multiple cores unless compiled for it, so unless you're going to be doing a lot of heavy data processing (like video conversion) a dual core will happily run your applications for you with horsepower ready to go when the OS does its stuff, or when you have several apps going.

Besides, I hear the original Phenoms have heat problems. Not sure about that, though.


I would like to piggy back on this.

Go with the PhenomII.
I have the AMD64 X2 6000+. Even tho my system kernel is compiled for SMP only about 1 in 8 programs are compiled or even wrote for SMP. Not to mention I have never seen BOTH cores topped out at 100%.

[Exodist]

quad core is AM2 while dual core is AM3
my money is on AM3.
and maybe you could consider getting what I have : PhenomII X3 blackedition. Really a good buy (I haven't managed to overheat it, and albeit! I tried!!)


You have been miss informed.

AM2 and AM3 simply refer to the socket architecture being used.

AM3 for example has everything from Semprons, Single Core Althlons, Dual Cores, Tri Cores and Quads.

The main diference in AM2 and AM3 is the Voltage, wattage and clock frequency being used.

[Ruhani04]

Just a quick input regarding SSD.
I have been using an OCZ Vertex 30GB for all my programs and OS (9.04).
They run around 100+ right now. I have to agree with the others that this is probably one the best upgrades you can do.
My setup recommendation is two have at least two HDs, one SSD and one "turning" one for the best performance and cost efficiency.
I just ordered one more ( Corsair extreme series 32GB) for my wife's msi wind netbook.
Most SSD companies use Samsung flash memory but the key is to get the Indilinx Barefoot controller which seems to have the best performance besides Intel.
PSU is definitely also of great importance and I must say that the corsair 400W is a good value. I just put one into an older computer and the cost was only $25 with rebate and bing cashback.