Quads coming of age?

[Zonker]

Well many of us already have uses for those extra cores, but up until now I would have recommended an x2 or x3 for a gaming machine and spend the extra on gpu. Browsing the specs on Dragon Age (the latest hot release), I notice x2 is now minimum specs and x4 is recommended.

I guess this will be an increasing trend.... so.... time to steer people to 620 or 810 for budget gaming rigs?

[jjjc_93]

I wouldn't say yes just yet.. A "high" clocked dual core will still be fine for people on a tight budget..

[SSPrncVegeta]

Originally Posted by Zonker

Well many of us already have uses for those extra cores, but up until now I would have recommended an x2 or x3 for a gaming machine and spend the extra on gpu. Browsing the specs on Dragon Age (the latest hot release), I notice x2 is now minimum specs and x4 is recommended.

I guess this will be an increasing trend.... so.... time to steer people to 620 or 810 for budget gaming rigs?

Depends on what proportion of the work done by the CPU is sequential and doesn't benefit from extra cores. The idea behind requiring a "Core 2 Quad" might not necessarily mean it requires four cores, just the performance that goes with processors of that bracket. Like if I said "requires Radeon 4000 or above," it includes the lowest of the low 4250 or whatever it is, but a 3870 would obviously still be better.

[buttons]

Personally I highly recommend the 620 as is. However there is nothing wrong with recommending a callisto 550 with a motherboard that can unlock it. if both left at stock speed, the callisto would surely produce better framerate.

I am currently using a sempron as my gaming machine (world of warcraft) and its capped at 60fps with settings on high, max resolution, but only 1x AA

[jjjc_93]

As far as I understand it, the GPU still plays a bigger part in gaming then a CPU...therefore on a budget it would be more beneficial to get a dual core and good graphics rather then a quad core and mediocre graphics.
Let me know if there is more to it then this.

[MarkOne]

Exactly..... A $ 100 E7500 is often more than enought..... I will put a good HD also before a Quad.

Originally Posted by jjjc_93

As far as I understand it, the GPU still plays a bigger part in gaming then a CPU...therefore on a budget it would be more beneficial to get a dual core and good graphics rather then a quad core and mediocre graphics.
Let me know if there is more to it then this.

[Zonker]

The question isn't for those who want to play the current stable of games. Wind back 12 months and quads were too rare for mass audience developers to target. Hence we have the current generation of single thread games that run fine on any quick processor.

But a game will bottle neck on gpu or cpu depending on how its coded. I'm getting the feeling that with coming releases you may have to start cutting back on features (like AI complexity) if you are only running a x2.

Dragon Age is quite pointed in asking for a quad for recommended requirements. x2 is now min. It will be interesting to see what this means in practice.

[Fr0sty]

Originally Posted by Zonker

Well many of us already have uses for those extra cores, but up until now I would have recommended an x2 or x3 for a gaming machine and spend the extra on gpu. Browsing the specs on Dragon Age (the latest hot release), I notice x2 is now minimum specs and x4 is recommended.

I guess this will be an increasing trend.... so.... time to steer people to 620 or 810 for budget gaming rigs?

quads are more than needed if people are serious with computer for work..... cant go wrong with 4 or even more cores when it comes to photoshop,cad etc... web browsing duties and normal duties that could be filled by a laptop really dont requires high power cpu

[SSPrncVegeta]

Related article: http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...ores/Practice/

[Zonker]

Originally Posted by SSPrncVegeta

Related article: http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...ores/Practice/

Nice find. Shame they didn't put a 620 in the mix, I'm guessing it would of put up similar numbers to the stock q6600.

So looks like the fast x2's will still get by. They are looking rather 'end of life cycle' though, cpu shouldn't be bottle necking a game to the low 20's fps.

[Archer0915]

Quads are really good for one thing on the home machine ATM, DC software. BONIC can be set to utilize 50% of cores @ a 80% rate, there is generally no impact for most users with this formula.

Quads can save lives. Buy a quad if you can and use it to it's full potential!!!

[Liranan]

Originally Posted by Archer0915

Quads are really good for one thing on the home machine ATM, DC software. BONIC can be set to utilize 50% of cores @ a 80% rate, there is generally no impact for most users with this formula.

Quads can save lives. Buy a quad if you can and use it to it's full potential!!!

MY system constantly runs BOINC. It doesn't help my electricity bills but I'm helping science. I don't like Folding as it crashes my drivers and PC but I do like SETI and other astronomical applications.

[Archer0915]

Originally Posted by Liranan

MY system constantly runs BOINC. It doesn't help my electricity bills but I'm helping science. I don't like Folding as it crashes my drivers and PC but I do like SETI and other astronomical applications.

I don't run the power hungry quads but there is a power impact. I have measured the draw on my rigs and the dual is the most inefficient. Watt to watt a main stream quad is more efficient per work output than a high end dual. A low power quad 95w or less is far superior to everything cost to output.