little question about notebooks processors

i have a little question.Lets say that i have 2 notebooks.One with dual core processors (for example x9100 or t9500) and the quad core processors (for example q9450 or q660).Crysis doesn´t support quad core processors so will be there some lower fps in quad processors against duo processors?

 

No, since the GPU is typically the bottleneck. Chances will be the Q9450 or Q6600 processor'ed notebook will have a stronger GPU though...

 

All the fps is about the GPU. So no, the quad won't be slowing down Crysis.

 

Check out the recommended specs of the game....It says recommended Core 2 Duo 2.2GHz <-- (It utilizes only two cores)....so even a T8300 will make the game run smooth..!!
GPU - You would need at least an 8800GTS or higher to play that game well and about 2GB ram..!!
So the Q6600 - being 2.4GHz will be fine with Crysis
Check out this link....

 

You couldn't run into a cpu bottle neck even with the low end dual core CPUs available in notebooks IMHO.

 

Actually there is a guy with an 8800M and a T5550 which is 1.83 GHz, and he struggles with some games because that CPU is the bottleneck for him. I think that a dual processor needs to be at least 2.0 GHz as this is the speed that is required and/or recoomended by high end games.

 

The reason is partly due to the FSB, a t7100 has the same clock speed but faster FSB and I doubt that the t7100 will create a bottleneck when gaming.

 

You might have a point there, but I still think that it's safe to go for 2.0 GHz.

 

Personally I agree, I always like to go 2.0+ on a laptop for multitasking ease. But if I was the kind of person that has just a game and maybe a voice chat client open then less then 2.0 should do. For me though it wouldn't as I have a ton of other things going on when Im gaming to feel comfortable on anything less then my current t8100.

 

In one forum some guy reply me these:

"Theoretically if the single core speed of the dual and quad were the same, fps would be the same. But quads run slower than dual's by design (mainly heat issues) and also quads can't overclock as well as dual's so all around it's just better to buy a dual for gaming to get a really high single core speed (since a lot of games still don't use multiple cores).

Hope this helps a little. Oh and the difference between AMD and Intel appears even on the same core speed because of intel's superior chip architecture in case you were wondering."

Is that true that quads run slower than duals?

 

Well, Quads do OC better, since there are 4 cores affected by the OC....
Also OCing depends upon the motherboard, i.e. the system management bus in use and also the clock generator chip....
It is better to buy a dual core becuase most are considered to be cost-beneficial as OEM, since most games and software still don't use more than two threads....!! Quads do have greater TDP than Dual-cores, and you would needa better cooling system for them, but that doesn't make quads inferior to dual-core cpus....Since TDP comes more into play when all the cores are fully-loaded....But the later revision of quads do show lower temps than before..!!
But as Retail, what do you think is better to choose, a $200 Q6600 (has twice the amount of cache than the E6600) or a $300 E6600..??

 

Any quad with the same clock speed as the duo wouldn't run Crysis slower. Maybe if the FSB is lower sure it can give you less fps, but that's not about quad or duo cores.