I am looking into a new PC soon (mine is 3 years old and getting slower by the minute) and wondered is there any advantage in using quad core as opposed to dual or the more normal processosors. I know the software has yet to come along to take advantage of it, but does it run any quicker than normal i.e is it worth the extra money.

I do prefer to use AMD over Intel and the less power they use the better....so any suggestions or ideas are welcome

thinking of something like this

Barebone Bundle AMD X2 AM2 6000 Dual Core 2GB 667Mhz Dual Channel DDR Hiper PSU MSI nForce 570 SLi Motherboard : bb-x2n6dv

Put it this way I am am currently running two user who are both folding

I'm also burning a dvd, I've got outlook running and I'm posting this. And everything is running fine. I'm sure someone else will be along to explain the finer points in a moment.

fyi mine is overclocked from 2.4ghz to 3.6ghz(50% free power) which probably helps

I'd go for intel these days as the AMD bods seem to have lost the plot!!

I have always been an amd fan but have just got my first intel chip in years, as amd do nothing which even comes close in terms of performance per pound

:iagree:

theres not much that will take advantage of a quad core at the moment, but it provides kinda future-proofing.. and Quad cores are so cheap these days! when building one i couldnt find anything that made the cpu break a sweat.. on the other hand, my Athlon X2 the cpu usage usually hovvers round the 15-20% in vista with firefox, outlook, msn and winamp playing.. the same barely registers on a quad core.

Slight correction .....3 users folding now

Still able to post this

There is also this to consider, as it seem's that AMD may be regaining the plot.

I like the idea of motherboard compatibility, an interesting read for AMD fans (PS I have an intel )

Phenom 9700, AMD's 1st Quad-Core CPU | Tom's Hardware

There is also this to consider, as it seem's that AMD may be regaining the plot.

I like the idea of motherboard compatibility, an interesting read for AMD fans (PS I have an intel )

Phenom 9700, AMD's 1st Quad-Core CPU | Tom's Hardware

yes the phenom.. (pronounced venom lol) not as quick as the Intel offering, but its cheaper, plus the compatibility is there

shame im still stuck with skt 939 and ddr 1

shame im still stuck with skt 939 and ddr 1

That was the problem I had till recently. Stuck in the 939 hole

I am looking into a new PC soon (mine is 3 years old and getting slower by the minute) and wondered is there any advantage in using quad core as opposed to dual or the more normal processosors. I know the software has yet to come along to take advantage of it, but does it run any quicker than normal i.e is it worth the extra money.

I do prefer to use AMD over Intel and the less power they use the better....so any suggestions or ideas are welcome

thinking of something like this

Barebone Bundle AMD X2 AM2 6000 Dual Core 2GB 667Mhz Dual Channel DDR Hiper PSU MSI nForce 570 SLi Motherboard : bb-x2n6dv

Back on the original topic though..

I would wait a short while and maybe look at the AMD phenom.. its allegedly much better at power-saving than the intel quad core (can throttle individual cores).. and as much as it pains me to say it.. avoid Nvidia chipsets at all costs.. its by far been the biggest PITA ive ever had with my machine and Vista, the drivers are very very shoddy.

edit, and the novatech price isnt that great compared to the supersavers on scan this weekend:

Intel Core 2 Duo E4600 Combo

* Coolermaster RC-331 Elite Black/Silver Midi Tower Case w/o PSU

* 550W EZcool Silent pPFC Power Supply AMD & P4 Ready 12cm Silent Fan 24Pin 6xPCI SATA

* Intel Core 2 Duo E4600, S775, 2.4 GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2MB Cache, Retail

* 2GB (2x1GB) Corsair TwinX XMS2, DDR2 PC2-6400 (800), 240 Pins, Non-ECC Unbuffered, CAS 4-4-4-12

* 500 GB Samsung HD501LJ Spinpoint T166, SATA II, 7200 rpm, 16MB Cache, 8.9 ms, NCQ

* Samsung x20 DVD RW SH-S203D/BEBN SATA BLACK

* Abit AB9 WiFi iP965, S775, PCI-E (x16), DDR2 533/667/800, SATA II, SATA RAID, ATX

* 1.44Mb Sony Black Floppy Disk Drive OEM

£292.58 inc vat

AMD AM2 Athlon 64 6000+ Dual Core Combo

* Coolermaster RC-331 Elite Black/Silver Midi Tower Case w/o PSU

* 550W EZcool Silent pPFC Power Supply AMD & P4 Ready 12cm Silent Fan 24Pin 6xPCI SATA

* AMD AM2 Athlon 64 6000+ Dual Core 3.0GHz, 2x 1MB Cache, Retail

* 2GB (2x1GB) Corsair TwinX XMS2, DDR2 PC2-6400 (800), 240 Pins, Non-ECC Unbuffered, CAS 4-4-4-12

* 500 GB Samsung HD501LJ Spinpoint T166, SATA II, 7200 rpm, 16MB Cache, 8.9 ms, NCQ

* Samsung x20 DVD RW SH-S203D/BEBN SATA BLACK

* Gigabyte GA-M52S-S3P (rev 1.0), NF6100, S AM2, PCI-E (x16), DDR2 667/800, SATA II, SATA RAID, ATX

* 1.44Mb Sony Black Floppy Disk Drive OEM

£287.88 inc vat

all you need then is a O/S and put it together!! im tempted at those prices :S

Having been an avid AMD fan for the last 8 years or so (went from K6 to Celeron to Athlon slot A phoar! that was amazing - floating point just trounced intel!), I can't see anything that AMD can offer at the moment which comes close to performance / vfm as everyone says.

I was also a bit miffed buying into S939 to have dual channel RAM and all the other goodness and a future-proofed-socket platform only to find out they ditched it for AM2 and developing a long chain of compatibility with that :(

I have my current S393 with an X2 running about as fast as it can stably but it is starting to show its limits in newest games (have a nvidia 7950gt atm) and the temptation of the new intel platforms is just too great.

I've been asking myself exactly the same question Rob, dual core or quad core, but the cost of quad core since they slashed them in the summer makes it rather tempting and worth going for imo

Quad core is awesome!

As has been said, it hardly breaks a sweat!

Even rendering video using all 4 cores, I've not seen usage go above 60% on all 4!

edit, sorry for drifting off topic.

An entire 2GB RAM / HDD / Case / PSU quad core system excluding just optical drive and graphics for under £300 inc VAT :eyepop: :eek: :jawsmall: :faint2:

P.S think I've found yet another use for all my overtime over the last month

Col has a very valid point ref chipsets, Nvidia seems to be a bit pants at the moment, but they are still the only graphics board to have imho.

My current i965 chipset is a generation behind the latest intel offerings but copes very well with my Quad core 6600 with no compatability issues.

If I was buying today, and you do a lot of "multimedia" type stuff along with folding etc then I would go intel.

If I was buying after Christmas I would be tempted to go for the "phenom" because of the planned longevity of the AM2 chipset. I am going to drop a line over to a chap I know who works for AMD and try to get some insider info on phenom's (naff name though)

edit, sorry for drifting off topic.

An entire 2GB RAM / HDD / Case / PSU quad core system excluding just optical drive and graphics for under £300 inc VAT :eyepop: :eek: :jawsmall: :faint2:

P.S think I've found yet another use for all my overtime over the last month

they have optical drives

they have optical drives

OKOK, but I'd rather they swap the drive for an 8800 at the same price :P

Having been an avid AMD fan for the last 8 years or so (went from K6 to Celeron to Athlon slot A phoar! that was amazing - floating point just trounced intel!), I can't see anything that AMD can offer at the moment which comes close to performance / vfm as everyone says.

I was also a bit miffed buying into S939 to have dual channel RAM and all the other goodness and a future-proofed-socket platform only to find out they ditched it for AM2 and developing a long chain of compatibility with that :(

I have my current S393 with an X2 running about as fast as it can stably but it is starting to show its limits in newest games (have a nvidia 7950gt atm) and the temptation of the new intel platforms is just too great.

I've been asking myself exactly the same question Rob, dual core or quad core, but the cost of quad core since they slashed them in the summer makes it rather tempting and worth going for imo

I agree with all this.. altho its not been much of an issue for me because all my gaming was done on the consoles... but now my bro has stolen both the eggbox and the Wii.. i tried to install Need For Speed pro-street on friday, and discovered it runs appallingly on my machine (more than likely shoddy EA coding rather than lack of power)

All i use my pc for now is surfin and watching TV eps on really.. im at that stage where upgrading will be expensive... a 8800gtx will physically not fit in my lian-li case either

The way things are going, when i buy a new machine.. it will probably be a dell, i just CBA with all the faffing and system tuning etc for that extra bit of power i dont need for looking at pr0n

I was also stuck in the S939 hole, and with AGP to boot. Decided to build a system around the 8800GTX and got the E6600 Dual Core - It runs like a dream and seems to cope with anything I chuck at it (although I haven't got around to trying Crysis yet).

As has been said, while not much software can really use the extra core(s), Windows can which means "multi-tasking" actually means just that (rather than other stuff running dog-slow in the background).

I was also stuck in the future proof socket 939 hole, and had the fastest X2 CPU you could get in the mobo. The thing that annoys me, is intel have stuck with the same socket for years yet AMD seem to change all the time. I would guess that had I changed to a AM2 socket, then AMD will come out with some other standard. At least my previous machine had PCI-E, with SLI so was future proof in every other way.

I now have a quad core Q6600, and am impressed with it. I am currently folding on 2 of the cores, leaving the other 2 free for other stuff.

My old machine, is now my HTPC and it seems perfect for that role.

By the look of things I may just be waiting to see what AMD come up with, phenom/venom wise, looks promising anyway

edit, sorry for drifting off topic.

An entire 2GB RAM / HDD / Case / PSU quad core system excluding just optical drive and graphics for under £300 inc VAT :eyepop: :eek: :jawsmall: :faint2:

P.S think I've found yet another use for all my overtime over the last month

Where were you sourcing bits from Xav?

Steve

Where were you sourcing bits from Xav?

Steve

IT was last weeks Scan bundle of the week (as shown above)

You want an X38 chipset based motherboard anyway as this supports PCI-E 2.0 which is twice as fast for a given number of lanes and has some nice power saving features etc.

The X38 supports ATI's Crossfire fully and supports SLI in hardware, but IIRC NV won't license SLI to intel so you can't use SLI.

You want an X38 chipset based motherboard anyway as this supports PCI-E 2.0 which is twice as fast for a given number of lanes and has some nice power saving features etc.

The X38 supports ATI's Crossfire fully and supports SLI in hardware, but IIRC NV won't license SLI to intel so you can't use SLI.

I would never buy a Nvidia motherboard again after the experiences ive had with the Nforce and shoddy drivers.. Nforce2 and now the Nforce4-SLI and vista.

PCI-E2.0 is really a non event... its hardly as if PCI-E bus bandwidth is an issue at all anyway these days and the power-saving would be negligable if you were running a mofo of a graphics card. (the centrino chipsets have had these powersaving features for ages)

X48 will be out soon that "officially" supports 1600fsb (although any decent hi-end X38 should be able to scale to this level)

Slightly of the main topic, but still relevant - you have a Hiper PSU in your original spec. I liked these when they came out, so much so that I bought 4 when building some machines for myself and a mate. I regret to say that ALL 4 PSU's failed between 14 and 16 months later, so I am distinctly unimpressed with them now. try and get a different make!

I also have an nForce SLI board, and won't be making that mistake again. It took me months to diagnose issues, and in the end it was the nVidia EIDE driver. Uninstalled that and used the stock MS one, no issues since.

chipset is the reason I've been trying to steer away from AMD in the recent past (although that could well have changed since the ATi/AMD bumlove);

first Athlon with an AMD chipset was rock-solid. PIII with Intel chipset was, again, rock-solid. numerous Athlons with SiS and nVidia chipsets were ropey at best :(