I dare ppl to say quad is better for games lol, Its just cool to say you have a quad cpu and impresses ppl.
Try sup com and unreal tornament.
Then do some research before you post.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Q6600 or the AMD Phenom 9500?
- Thread starter Blue Cypher
- Start date
Try sup com and unreal tornament.
Then do some research before you post.
Quad core gaming on those two games I mention will yield higher FPS over a dual core system.
Period.
EDIT:show me some charts between both cpus at the same clock speed, (3ghz or over),using the same graphics card then? and if my common sense is wrong I totally hold my hands up guys. But I cant see how a quad can out perform a dual , if the dual isnt totally maxed out on both cores?? Im just using common sense.
Last edited:
Its like Last summer when I changed my [email protected] single core cpu, to a opty [email protected] dual core cpu. because the cpu was slowing my gfx card down, and now its the other way around my cpu is a hell of a lot faster then my gfx card now Ive changed,, and Im sure in 2yrs or so I will have to upgrade my dual cpu to quad, cos the dual will be slowing up the gfx card. But theres totally no reason to change to quad for at least 2yrs maybe more, if your a gamer, cos you will see no benefit changing from dual to quad until the gfx card can max out the cpu,, then the whole cycle starts again.
Last edited:
Wrong, you can use any current or previous generation 771 cpu.
It's the ultimate premium product, what do you expect? Dirt cheap parts and poor multi-gpu support?
Why choose the inferior product though?
If you're that bothered, why not google it?
UT3 and SupCom are the first two games that spring to mind.
Then you have the 8core cpus comming out next year, you wont see any improve when they come out, for 3 - 4 years later in the gamming world cos graphics cards wont need quad core to run at full tilt, let alone 8cores.... But guys you see what I mean???
The 8 core systems that are to come out soon are not aimed at general enthusiasts/gamers. They are aimed at people who need huge amounts of cpu power for encoding/rendering/etc.
The multi core cpus that are coming out next year are just product evolutions of current lines, everything gets quicker with each generation, they will still be aimed at the same people who bought quad cores in this generation.
I can't say exactly what will have happened in the software world over the next few years but parallel threading defiantly has a place in there somewhere.
The multi core cpus that are coming out next year are just product evolutions of current lines, everything gets quicker with each generation, they will still be aimed at the same people who bought quad cores in this generation.
I can't say exactly what will have happened in the software world over the next few years but parallel threading defiantly has a place in there somewhere.
I cant find bench marks of 3ghz or over both at the same speed for both cpus, and theres no point benchmarking them less then 2.8ghz, cos then of course the quad will win cos the dual cpu will be maxed out on both cores... but at the end of the day quad cannot beat dual core if the cores of the dual cpu are not maxed out,,,END OF STORY
You clearly don't get it.
dont get what? how is it possible for quad to overtake a game or a app if the cores are not going at full tilt, cos a quad will be running even slower then the dual, cos it wont need as much pcocessing power as the dual,, but for that app or game both cpus will be using the same amount of processing power cos the app or game dont need anymore processing power from either cput to run it?
Perhaps not, but the picture is far from black and white. True multi-core programming, in games at least, is a good few years away yet.
I will point out that writing a good multi-threaded code is far more complicated than writing a program on a single thread, and games are already pretty complex programs as it is. On a more practical level, there are communication costs to consider. Transferring data between different threads can introduce heavy latencies, and so it is often the case that you will actually lose performance by spreading an application over two or more CPUs. For the immediate future, you will see only fairly self-contained modules farmed out to other cores (like sound or perhaps physics), with the main game-logic all residing on one core.
Unfortunately, the fact of the matter is that it will take a major revision in programming languages to allow a realistic path to implementing general applications (and games specifically) which run automatically on several cores. This is a bit of bummer for us gamers, since the number of cores on a CPU will have doubled many times before then.
Yes, you may see games farming out small portions to increasing numbers of CPU cores, but the majority of game logic will continue to reside on a single CPU. The only games which will realistically see good multi-core support are large-scale strategy games, where you have thousands of fairly independent entities each performing instructions based on their local environment.
Of course, a quad core CPU is always going to be better than a dual, clock for clock, but pound-for-pound I still say dual is the way to go for gaming - particularly if you're not interested in RTSs.
sorry guys I hold my hands up,, there is a diff, but the clock speeds are not very high. So I dont know if it would be such a big diff at higher clockspeeds on a intel system with supreme commander??
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-triple-phenom,review-30406-5.html
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-triple-phenom,review-30406-5.html
Last edited:
