• 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.

Quad or not to quad - should I upgrade

ripkord

ripkord

ripkord

Associate
Joined
5 Feb 2004
Posts
405
Location
Glasgow
Hi, I currently have a Socket AM2 Athlon 64 x2 4800, overclocked to 3GHz.

Seeing as gaming only uses one core anyway - would I see a performance increase (in games) if I had to upgrade to a socket AM2 Phenom 9500?

I plan to replace my 7950GX2 with the 9800GX2 when it comes out as well so in a way the question is moot - although I would appreciate some comments anyway. - IE other non-gaming performance boosts.

Thanks
 
The 'old' kentsfield Q6600 will be an even better buy once the yorkfield cpu's arrive as the performance difference between the two isn't that big especially when you consider the yorkies will be multilocked so a 4ghz q6600 will still be on par with say a yorkie at 3.6 yet cost less.

I really cant see the point in staying amd at this moment unless you are happy with your current rig.
 
ripkord said:
Hi, I currently have a Socket AM2 Athlon 64 x2 4800, overclocked to 3GHz.

Seeing as gaming only uses one core anyway - would I see a performance increase (in games) if I had to upgrade to a socket AM2 Phenom 9500?

I plan to replace my 7950GX2 with the 9800GX2 when it comes out as well so in a way the question is moot - although I would appreciate some comments anyway. - IE other non-gaming performance boosts.

Thanks
Click to expand...
I have the same question except I'd be going from an e4300 (@3.275) to a q6600 - what difference would I realistically see, if any?

As ripkord says, games only use one core anyway don't they? So the only advantages I'd see are in 3d6 and palying around with film (wich I don't).

I have this upgrade itch going though, so I keep getting these little demons telling me my PC would go nova if only I put a q6600 in it - little buggers. The problem is that I really do want to see a difference this time, not just an incremental performance increase. I suppose I should wait till the penryns and new GPUs come out. When is that?
 
w3bbo said:
The 'old' kentsfield Q6600 will be an even better buy once the yorkfield cpu's arrive as the performance difference between the two isn't that big especially when you consider the yorkies will be multilocked so a 4ghz q6600 will still be on par with say a yorkie at 3.6 yet cost less.

I really cant see the point in staying amd at this moment unless you are happy with your current rig.
Click to expand...

The point here is though not many run Q6600's at 4ghz 24/7

But I do agree I'll stick with my Q6600 if it costs me more than 200 for 200MHZ more speed with penryn clock for clock.

3.6ghz penryn is not exciting enough when I'm running Q6600 at 3.8ghz 24/7
 
Alex R said:
I have the same question except I'd be going from an e4300 (@3.275) to a q6600 - what difference would I realistically see, if any?

As ripkord says, games only use one core anyway don't they? So the only advantages I'd see are in 3d6 and palying around with film (wich I don't).

I have this upgrade itch going though, so I keep getting these little demons telling me my PC would go nova if only I put a q6600 in it - little buggers. The problem is that I really do want to see a difference this time, not just an incremental performance increase. I suppose I should wait till the penryns and new GPUs come out. When is that?
Click to expand...

Unless you do encoding video work etc...then having a Quad will see little perfromance increases in games.

If yopu want an upgrade then get wolfdale.
 
easyrider said:
Unless you do encoding video work etc...then having a Quad will see little perfromance increases in games.

If yopu want an upgrade then get wolfdale.
Click to expand...

Agree completely, currently even a single core system is fine for most games.

Phenom donesn't look much quicker clock for clock than your current CPU, and you've got a decent overclock out of it too.

Unless encoding is your thing, stay as you are :)
 
Are there any more games out which are actually utilising 4 cores? Still just Supreme Commander?
I don't think it'd be worth going quad for the OP, but I can see why people stay AMD.
Phenom 9500 < £130 + no effort
Whole new setup >£130 + small amount of effort....

Best thing to get a boost in games would be a new GPU I'd have thought. An X2 at 3ghz isn't a bad CPU.
 
Your X2 at 3Ghz is a good chip and since you are not into video-encoding or running winrar 24/7 then going to a quad core system wouldn't be a wise thing to do. Your video card is good aswell so i would wait a while longer for upgrading since you will waste money for very little performance gains.
 
thanks guys , thats pretty much the response i was expecting, to be honest the 7950gx2 isnt as great as I had hoped, the newer games like cod4 arent as smooth as they probably should be, you are right about wasting money though, I just seen the price of some of the better 8800's and the 9800 will be more expensive again :o
 
ripkord said:
thanks guys , thats pretty much the response i was expecting, to be honest the 7950gx2 isnt as great as I had hoped, the newer games like cod4 arent as smooth as they probably should be, you are right about wasting money though, I just seen the price of some of the better 8800's and the 9800 will be more expensive again :o
Click to expand...

What resolution are you gaming at, surprised CoD4 isn't running great :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom