Dual vs quad core - choosing

JimLewandowski · 31 Jan 2012

GeneO said:

Are you saying quad cores can't match the clock speeds of dual cores? Why not go back to single core with high clock?

Not at all. I was just making a comment that clock speed generally rules (with the aformentioned exceptions. A single processor is prone to lockup (non-yielding loop) so not a good choice even if fast.

GeneO · 31 Jan 2012

I never had a single core processor do that

I would not want to run software on a multi-core processor that would take one of the cores out either,

GeneO · 31 Jan 2012

Sardonicus said:

Some of the Ivy Bridge chips will sport 4 cores, 8 threads. No mistake, I did say 8 threads.
They'll probably create quite a performance distance between any of the dual-core chips.

Hyperthreading was introduced a while back. Sandy bridge and the generation before it supported 4 cores with 8 threads, Nothing new.

logicearth · 01 Feb 2012

The new i7-3960X has 12 threads, 6 cores. I won't be surprised to see an i7-39##X with 8 cores. The two cores are already there just disabled.

M1GU31 · 01 Feb 2012

JimLewandowski said:

Correct, M1GU31. But, is the offset of getting that quad core benefit for video editing/3D worth the slower performance the rest of the time you use your PC?

think of it this way with a quad core you got 4 hands to help out but with a duo core you only got two. Plus my quad is 3.0ghz so its pretty darn fast and when i do models in 3dmax i get no slow downs unlike i would with a duo core around the same clocks, which would be ok but a quad is the sweet spot imo, the other pc i use with duo core is a bit more sluggish then my quad