2.8 Core Duo GHz or Quad Core

I guess a 2.8 core duo is a much faster processor than a quad core in current applications. I wonder what I am missing without a quad core. The latest laptop I bought was a 2.8 I saved some money and invested in the new M17x with a single 260 Nvidia chip. Was thinking of a quad core but was told that I need to run applications or games that utilize four cores ... and that what is more common now is the core duo.. I also found out that a quad core costs a fortune if compared to a core duo. I run some 3D programs. Some recent games and do some programming in Visual C. Matlab real time environment and that sort of thing..What do you think..have I made the right choice?

 

This shouldn't be in this section. They're both great processors, you really can't go wrong with either. I think it'll take about a year (or so) to have quad cores used commonly.

Back when dual core processors came out, they were much faster at nearly everything than a higher clocked single core. I haven't had enough time on high-end dual core and quad core systems to have the best idea of this, these are just my thoughts. I ponder about this too.

 

in a multi-threaded environment.... the fastest of dual-cores will lose against the cheapest of quad-core.

 

there are 3ghz quadcores so in those case, your point is mood.


in a bestcase szenario for the quadcore, all cores get used, then i get 4x2.4ghz in my case, that's 9.6ghz. you would need a 4.8ghz core2duo to be as fast.

so a 1.5ghz quadcore could in it's best case beat your 2.8ghz core2duo.

 

Also consider the prices of the Quads through Dell are jacked up greatly... you can purchase and install the parts yourself at a much much cheaper price, I am getting a QX9300 Quad 2.53ghz processor for 400

 

Actually that isnt accurate because of the amount of threads involved (4 quad as opposed to 2)

 

it still is accurate. if the process is multithreaded, we have the best case szenario and get in a quadcore up to 4x the speed of it's clockrate at a single core. a dualcore will have at most 2x the speed.

that's why i said bestcase. if an app isn't made for quadcores, you won't see benefit.


and yes, btw, those numbers work 100%. get the arauna realtime raytracing demo and see the x4 and x2 in speed when you use more cores.

 

Hmm, i tested a q9000 @1.5ghz v a p9500 @ 3.0 so both 6ghz in a wprime32 test, the q9000 still comes out ontop (only by a second or 2) because of the ability to handle more threads simletaneously.

But there is only a minor gap.

 

Only get quad if you know that you will actually use it to its true potential.

 

it depends , from what i think....if you're going to use your laptop for around...2-3 years ahead , and had problems with upgrading processors then quad core is yours .... it is futureproof i think...

but if you're going to use it for 1-2 year...i dont think quads can benefit from that .. since multithreaded applications so far are still not that much compare when transition from single to dual cores...