Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Which Processor is better?

12 Jan 2010   #1

Windows 7 x64
 
 
Which Processor is better?

I want to know which Processor is better and why?

1.) (Dual Core) Intel® Core™ i7-620M 2.66GHz (3.33Ghz Turbo Mode, 4M cache)

OR

2.) (Quad Core) Intel Core i7 820QM 1.73GHz (3.06GHz Turbo Mode, 8MB Cache)

And im mostly using this computer for gaming, So which one do you Recommend?


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

12 Jan 2010   #2

Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1
 
 

I'm not very saavy when it comes to mobile hardware, but...

Just looking at the specs, I'd go for option #1.

Fast dual core > slow quad core.... Every time.

EDIT: Although the 8MBs of cache on the 820QM = very tempting.

EDIT#2: http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=43560,43124
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Jan 2010   #3

Windows 7 x86/x64, Server 2008r2, Web Server 2008
 
 

The larger cache for the quad.
dual core is 2.66 with 2 cores is 5.32
Or a quad at 6.92
You also have to remember the i7 is HT

I would jump for the quad core.
The dual core can only run 4 steams at once.
The quad can run 8 threads.
This is because the HT.

I would go for the quad core any day. But it will also kill power and batter life....
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.


12 Jan 2010   #4

Windows 7 Home Premium x64(desktop), Windows 7 Professional x86(laptop)
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by mckillwashere View Post
The larger cache for the quad.
dual core is 2.66 with 2 cores is 5.32
Or a quad at 6.92
Each core is not 2.66 or 1.73GHz, the GHz is spread over 2 or 4 cores.

Anyway, I would probably go for the quad core, it has a lower clock speed, but that isn't everything, and it's cache is twice the size.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Jan 2010   #5
Microsoft MVP

Win 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by mckillwashere View Post
The larger cache for the quad.
dual core is 2.66 with 2 cores is 5.32
Or a quad at 6.92
You also have to remember the i7 is HT
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Tommyd View Post

Each core is not 2.66 or 1.73GHz, the GHz is spread over 2 or 4 cores.

Anyway, I would probably go for the quad core, it has a lower clock speed, but that isn't everything, and it's cache is twice the size.
You're both wrong, and you both went in opposite directions to get there. A quad or dual core is exactly what it says, 2 or 4 cores in a single package. And no the MHz is not spread over all the cores, and the speed is not the sum of all the cores. The speed is exactly what it says it is; 2 or 4 cores running at 2.66 GHz.

Im a Noob are you looking to run one of these in a desktop, or swapping one for what you currently have in your notebook? If it is going to go into a desktop you will need a motherboard that will support mobile CPU's. If it is for you laptop, make good and sure that the laptop is up to cooling a new CPU.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Jan 2010   #6

Win 7 pro 64-bit, Ubuntu 9.10 64-bit
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Tommyd View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by mckillwashere View Post
The larger cache for the quad.
dual core is 2.66 with 2 cores is 5.32
Or a quad at 6.92
Each core is not 2.66 or 1.73GHz, the GHz is spread over 2 or 4 cores.

Anyway, I would probably go for the quad core, it has a lower clock speed, but that isn't everything, and it's cache is twice the size.
Wrong, big time...
Anyway, i'd go with the fast dual-core, its cheaper and really enough for gaming. most of the work there is done by the GPU and thus quads dont matter very much... Save your money, get the dual core! It also heats less, and takes less power...
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Jan 2010   #7

Windows 7 x64
 
 

Thanks for the answers guys, I guess im going with the dual core!
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Jan 2010   #8

Windows 7 x86/x64, Server 2008r2, Web Server 2008
 
 

Quote:
Wrong, big time...
Anyway, i'd go with the fast dual-core, its cheaper and really enough for gaming. most of the work there is done by the GPU and thus quads dont matter very much... Save your money, get the dual core! It also heats less, and takes less power...

I was referring to Each core adding up.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Jan 2010   #9
Microsoft MVP

Win 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by mckillwashere View Post
Quote:
Wrong, big time...
Anyway, i'd go with the fast dual-core, its cheaper and really enough for gaming. most of the work there is done by the GPU and thus quads dont matter very much... Save your money, get the dual core! It also heats less, and takes less power...
I was referring to Each core adding up.
They still don't add up. A quad core running with 4 cores at 3.0 GHz each, is till only running at 3.0 GHz, not running at 12 GHz.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Jan 2010   #10

Windows 7 x86/x64, Server 2008r2, Web Server 2008
 
 

One physical processor,
With four cores,
Each core running at 1.73 ghz x4 = 1 physical processor running at 5.32 not counting HT
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Which Processor is better?




Thread Tools



Similar help and support threads for2: Which Processor is better?
Thread Forum
i5 processor Hardware & Devices
About The Processor.. Hardware & Devices
Which processor is better? Hardware & Devices
What Processor Should I Go With? Hardware & Devices
Which Processor is Better Hardware & Devices
2.80 GHz Processor w/ 8GB RAM - Need Help Performance & Maintenance
Help with processor Hardware & Devices

Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 PM.
Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App
  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33