i'm tired of everyone asking should they go to quad core.
Here is my answer
NO!
Quad core is a waist of money right now, we don't have any need for it. quad core was developed for server use. it was designed to be able to run a massive ammount of programs at once.
I think the common misconseption is that if you have quad core it will be alot faster. but that is not really true. it isn't any faster, it can just run more things at a time. they still run at equal clock speeds, the quad core just has the equivalant of 4. for example, just because you have a 2GHz quad core CPU doesn't mean that you have 8GHz. you just have 4 2GHz.
I have an intel 2.66GHz dual core, 4GB of RAM and i run dual 19" widescreens, i can open every program on my computer, and my ram will fill up long before my CPU will bog down.
So for those of you out there who want a quad core so bad you can taste it. don't waist your money trying to show off, go buy something usefull, like dual Nvidia 8800 GTX's, or a USB beverage cooler. lol
That is true but quad core technology won't be needed for anything but servers for many years to come. oh and the only Quad core worth having is the core 2 extreme, and they're about $900. the rest won't really offer much of a performance boost, aside from EXTREME multitasking. :-)
Oh and i meant the GTS OC 512Mb not GTX they are over rated.
it all really depends on what you're doing with your PC. mine is core2duo 1.83, and it has trouble running as many VMs as I need at once. If I had a quad core, I'd be able do distribute CPUs in a more efficient way.
I think the common misconseption is that if you have quad core it will be alot faster. but that is not really true. it isn't any faster, it can just run more things at a time. they still run at equal clock speeds, the quad core just has the equivalant of 4. for example, just because you have a 2GHz quad core CPU doesn't mean that you have 8GHz. you just have 4 2GHz.
just go to wikipedia and read what multithreading means, and why developers stopped adding to CPU speed, and started expanding the number of cores instead.
my quad - cpu server (quad pentium 3 xenons) kicks the ass off of my core2 extreme using windows server 2003 OS
Your also using a Server OS. like i said earlyer, the quad core was developed for server use. so your OS was built to utilize all aspects of the quad core technology.
BUT IT STILL ISN'T PRACTICAL!!!!! which was my big problem in the first place. you pay way too much for something that really isn't that much better.
just go to wikipedia and read what multithreading means, and why developers stopped adding to CPU speed, and started expanding the number of cores instead.
Ok. first of all it's Hyper-threading, not multithreading.
Second, it's still a new technology, and they haven't perfected it yet. they have also had alot of security issues with hyperthreading, and alot of problems with cross talk.
Third of all, Wikipedia is a REALLY BAD source, because any yahoo that thinks they know something can post things there. they don't have to be true they just have to sound good.
it all really depends on what you're doing with your PC. mine is core2duo 1.83, and it has trouble running as many VMs as I need at once. If I had a quad core, I'd be able do distribute CPUs in a more efficient way.
thats just because you are using a 1.8. if you had a 2.3 or a 3 you wouldn't have that problem.
why do you think AMD hasn't built many quad core CPU's. because they realize that they can still get alot of performance out of dual core without driving the cost up.
No one has posted to this discussion for at least three months. Please let old threads die and do not reply to them unless you feel you have something new and valuable to contribute that absolutely must be added to make the discussion complete. Otherwise, please start a new thread in this forum instead.
Unsolved 
Offline 
