Windows 7: Core 2 Quad or Intel i5

Intel Boxed Processor Core 2 Quad Q8400
Hey guys, if you have to choose, which of the following CPU's would be best for the following applications I'm running. Both are priced the same.

Intel Core2Quad Q8400 2.66ghz vs Intel i5 650 3.2ghz

Apps:

AutoCAD 2010 64bit
Photoshop CS3
Video encoding and copying

BFBC2
Modern Warfare 2
ect.

Tnx allot

The quad core scores maybe 16% better in the Passmark benchmarks, but---

The i5 can be boosted from 3.2 to 3.46 (single core Turbo). That 3.46 is a 30% advantage over the 2.66 of the quad core.

I regularly see comments from quad core owners saying they wish they had stayed with a higher clocked dual core.

I'd go with the dual core unless you can find convincing evidence that your particular applications can in fact benefit significantly from 4 cores. You would then have to decide how often you use the applications that might benefit.

Here is a long thread on dual core versus quad core:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=232212

Why the i5-650 and not the 750?

BC2 would love you hard if you got a quad.

I know, BC2 is designed to run on Quad core, thats mainly why I asked cause the 650 is dual and I could get a quad for the same,(if not less) prise.

Would the 750 have a big performance advantage over the Q8400?

for video conversion, quad core is better. but that's only for programs that actually uses all the cores. BTW i have a Q8400 cpu and I play BC2. The cpu usage is for me is around 70%-100%

Ok so in a nutshell, It would be in my best interrest to fork out a few extra bucks and get the i5 750(quad core)?

I have the E8200 at the moment and it runs BC2 like a dream, but this new PC should last me at least 2 - 2.5 years.

Tnx for the replies.

Yes, go with the i5. keep in mind that intel is moving away from the old architecture and toward the Nehalem microarchitecture. the industry will note this and begin developing hardware and software applications with this kind of architecture and so you'll be making the right long term investment in the new technology. Nehalems all the way. as for gaming, it's not like you'll notice the difference between the i5 and the quadcore. where you'll notice the gains from the i5 is in multi-tasking on your rig...

Worth mentioning though is that Intel changes their direction quite frequently. So, while Nehalem might be the technology of the day....chances are in a few years it will be something new. So, in 2 to 2.5 years...there will be a new thing people will be developing for.

I just buy what I can afford at the time and worry about later...later.

ppparks makes a good point, of course. i'm biased because i've got an i5 in a laptop and an i7 in a desktop and i'm amazed virtually everyday at how great these two machines work. for the first time in my life i feel like i'm driving my computer (responsiveness). i've had a dual core and a core 2 duo (never had a quad core) but i just remember the dual core and and core 2 getting bogged down pretty easily once things started piling on (not a memory problem, there was plenty of that). so, while i agree with ppparks that intel will change its tack, for now, the stuff in the iLine is wonderful and if you've got the money for it, i'd go for it.

(also, the wiring job in ppparks computer is dope. good work parks)

For me, I've got a Core 2 Duo E8400 that I use as a desktop at work and I have a Core 2 Quad Q9550 at home and for me...both of these boxes have been absolutely fantastic. I've got 8GB of RAM in both as I am a systems admin and run lots of virtual machines. For my needs, my Q9550 is perfect and it's only a year old. I have no reason whatsoever to upgrade yet to anything in the iLine....although I do agree that they are fantastic CPU's.