Dual Core and Quad Core

I am a bit confused about the value of dual and quad core. Is a dual core processor of say 2.4ghz really worth 4.8ghz in processing power and is a quad core of 2.4ghz really worth 9.6ghz. Alone values like 24ghz are lower than some older computers so I am really confused.

Reason for asking. I am configuring online a new computer to run Vista Home Premium and have been thinking about this for some time but now I want to order. I have saved two options both with 4GB memory. One is dual core 2.66ghz with SLI m/bd and the other is quad core 2.4ghz non SLI m/bd. Prices are similar and the rest of the spec similar so which one is fastest? I tend to multi task quite a lot and I do extensive graphics, web design and sound files work.

My own feeling is to go for the non SLI m/bd quad core as I have been told elsewhere on here that don't really need SLI for the things I use the computer for.

http://compreviews.about.com/od/cpus/a/dualcore.htm

The quad core will be faster for applications (like picture editing) which can take advantage of 4 processors at the same time.

So yes, go with the quad core and non SLI... but make sure the video card you get natively supports DirectX 10.

MorseLady, without knowing which processors you're looking at, it's hard to get too specific about performance. The multi-core CPUs dont' scale directly in terms of performance (i.e. a quad core @ 2.4 GHz isn't twice as fast as a dual core) but the quad core would usually be a better performer. I'd certainly rather pay a few bucks more for a Core 2 Quad, than a comparably clocked Core 2 Duo.

Since you are planning to install 4 GB of RAM, you're doing Vista 64, right? I think you'd be really pleased with the performance of Vista 64 and 4 Gigs of memory with something like a Q6600.

The processors I am looking at are Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 and Core 2 Quad Q6600.

No I am not going for Vista 64, just the standard Vista Home Premium but I was told to buy as much memory as I can and 4ghz comes as standard with the two options I am looking at.

The video card will be 256MB nVIDIA GeForce 8500 GT.

After reading the replies I have decided on the Core 2 Quad Q6600non SLI configuration.

Thank you for your help.

The processors I am looking at are Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 and Core 2 Quad Q6600.

No I am not going for Vista 64, just the standard Vista Home Premium but I was told to buy as much memory as I can and 4ghz comes as standard with the two options I am looking at.

The video card will be 256MB nVIDIA GeForce 8500 GT.

After reading the replies I have decided on the Core 2 Quad Q6600 with non SLI configuration.

Thank you for your help.

Sorry I went to edit this message and it went to post before I could. I was going to add that I have just checked my saved quotes and the Quad Core does have SLI I was getting confused with the Dual Core options some of which do not have SLI.

It's none of my business, but that video card would appear to be a tad off for a new purchase considering you are going for Quad Core - it is DDR2!!! (or so I read).


I think you should ask about that too! (DDR3 at 512 isn't that expensive if you are gonna keep it for 3+ years).


My opinion. gl anyway

Normally, 32 bit versions of Vista won't recognize all 4 GB of your memory. There are some workarounds for this, and you can read about them here. 6 months ago, I would have gone with Vista 32, but nowadays just about any device that has a 32 bit driver for Vista has a 64 bit version as well. This shows you how much memory can be addressed by the different x64 versions.

You should know right off that your 4 gigs of memory wont show as more then 3.2 gigs . Thats a physical limitation of 32 bit operating systems. As slgrieb says there are sorta work arounds.
Also when doing the Prefomrmance indicator in Vista I scored 5.8 all across the board except the cpu which was a dual core 6400 @3.2 ghz. It scored 5.6. Now when I moved to a quad core 9500 which runs at 2.2 ghz, the cpu score jumped to 5.8. So Vista sees the quad cores at 2.2 as preforming significantly better then dual cores at 3.2 ghz. Although thats opnly a .2 jump in reference ot the cpu its pretty hard moving it .2 once you get to the 5.6/5.8 range.
Also unless your using some pretty junky hardware, I would definetly go for the 64 bit version od Vista. The drivers are out there and I dont see any problems with the software which is mainstream.
Also I should imagine sticking to a single video card will reduce issues with the system which may require technical help often.

Printers or scanners might be a problem with 64 bit

Morselady, what peripherals do you intend to attach to the vista machine?

While 32bit applications will run on Vista 64, the drivers must be the 64bit version.

If you are going to go SLI then you should look at Geforce 8800GTS 512MB DDR3 - remember you are going to need two of them for SLI.... or you can do 1 and add one later if you get the SLI capable board.

Thank you for your comments.

Regarding the video card the 8500GT is what Mesh offer so it must be OK they do not offer Vista 64 which I could not afford anyway. I have to balance being a cash strapped pensioner with wanting a decent Vista computer. I may yet upgrade one of my XP computers, this one actually checks out as being capable of running Vista Ultimate without any upgrading and my late husband's computer will run Home Premium just and I have already run Business on it for 30 days trial. Maybe add some more memory and upgrade the video card. The processors are quite good 3.4mhz Intel dual core prescott or something and both computers are coming up to three years old.

I am taking the Mesh configuration quad core PC and upgrading a few things like adding another optical drive, sound card rather than onboard sound and so on but the basic PC is what Mesh have configured. If I have quad core then I have to have an SLI m/bd which seems a waste if I don't add another video card.

I am beginning to think a higher speed dual core is best. The PC with quad is 2.4mhz but the dual core with 2.66mhz is about the same price.

I am beginning to feel overwhelmed so I might just buy an off the shelf PC exactly as configured by whoever I buy it from. My local small computer shop cannot begin to match the big boys on price or I would get them to build me one. The problem is there are many different basic configurations both Intel and AMD which you can take as it is or upgrade and there is some overlapping between the various models offered. I have been meaning to buy a new computer for months and every time I get bogged down by so many differetn considerations I do not quite understand. It is three years since I last did an MCP course, about five years since I did the Server 2000 City ahd Guilds course and even more since I did the old A+ course based on W98 and DOS and technology and over the past two years I have had other things on my mind and technology has moved so fast and has now left me behind.

I am going to go back to the drawing board and am going to sit on this one for a while because of my age and financial situation this will be the last new computer so it has to be good and as technologically advanced as my plastic can afford.

Noo I did not see your message until I had posted my reply.

Funny you should mention peripherals as I thought about that just as I posted my previous reply.

I am keeping my Viewsonic digital CRT DVI monitor, I really like it and it suits the fact that I have to wear spectacles with a prism in them.

Printer I use is a Canon PIXMA IP1500 and I have a IP2000 too that belonged to my husband. Both are over two years old.

Scanner is a Canon CanonScan D1250U2F film scanner at least three years old

Cameras are Fuji S9600 and E500 should be OK with Vista.

Linskys Wireless G broadband router and adaptors bought 2005

Olympus VN3100PC voice notebook but this is compatible with Vista.

Alba cheap MP3 player bought 2006

Tesco's cheap MP3 player I use as a flash drive bought 2006

Thank you for reminding me of this consideration Noo.

Vista 64 bit should be the same price as the 32bit. I do see sites adding £10 between them... but that's all.

It is confusing with the offerings. What you need to do is work out what you actually need. I personally don't think you need SLI.

The problem with off the shelf pcs is that they are limited to a few configurations. If I were speccing a system for you I would look for a non SLI motherboard with 1 ide port 4 or more SATA ports, 4 or more USB2 (firewire would a nice addition too). That would come out around £80

The quad core processor would be around £170

The sound card - well that's up to you

The graphics card ATI Radeon HD 3850 Pro at around £125

The optical drives are around £20-£30

SATA hard drives - a pair of WD 500GB so you can run raid if you like - £130

RAM - DDR2 or DDR3? DDR3 is very expensive at the moment. 4gig of 5300 £62

That would be a kickass machine... just not sli or xfire.

The parts would come out at about £600 add vista ultimate £100 and your sound card.

PM what you would like to spend.

Vista has the drivers for the IP1500 and IP2000 according to Canon.

The scanner is also compatible but for 32bit only.