off to bed now, but will leave you and Brian something to discuss.
would a tri-core 455 CPU clocked at 3.3ghz and costing £59 not be good, and possibly better in games due to the higher core speed and that not all games are that multi threaded to use a quad core.
The 645 is better in the majority of things (probably where multi-threading is used), but the 455 beats it in games. Which is what the OP is going to use the machine for mostly. However he wants good multi-tasking as well. So do you take a hit on the multi-tasking for a few frames per second in games, or take a hit in frames per second in games to benefit in multi-tasking?
And that's 3.1 vs 3.3. The gap would be even smaller with 3.2 vs 3.3. But the gap is ridiculously small already.
I would take the hit in multi-tasking (which probably wouldn't even be noticeable to an end user unless doing something particularly CPU intensive) and go with the tricore and put the money saved toward the GPU if it was for a gaming machine. If it was for a compiling/rendering machine I'd want as many cores as possible (I'm sitting watching an Intel Atom 270 (slowly) install FreeBSD at the minute. What I wouldn't give for a 330 right now).
another thought that occurred to me, is that the bequiet PSU says in the description that is
- Classic office and web applications
- Standard graphics applications
- Basic gaming
The office things I will be using,
Standard graphics, no
and basic gaming, no
All that is, is marketing spiel. It's a PSU, not a sentient being. It doesn't know what it's running. All it does is provide power to parts that need it.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.