Benefits of a CPU upgrade?

[bilzmale]

I am currently running an Athlon 64 X2 @ 2.7GHz. I notice newer CPUs don't run at a much faster clockspeed but have 3, 4 or 6 cores. If I went to a 4 core CPU at say 3GHz by what % would I expect my PC to speed up? And with 6 cores? Thanks for your responses.

 

[Jonathan_King]

It would depend on the programs you use. Apps like FireFox and WMP aren't designed to make use of multiple cores very well, but then, they don't use much CPU. They might actually run slower because of the lower clock speed.

CPU intensive programs, like games and VirtualBox, usually are designed to make use of all the cores. That's where the 4 and 6 core CPUs shine.

 

[Bill2]

Not too many popular apps can handle multiple cores. But for the few mulithreaded ones, quad cores represent a massive jump in processing speed. So, for the majority of regular users, there would not be much noticeable difference between the performance of a dual core vs. a quad core, individual core speeds being equal.

But I think, even if you are not a current "multi-threaded" application user today, you may well be in the future. Apps are being rewritten to take advantage of the multiple cores. Buying a quad core today should be a good insurance policy for the future. Also, there is a cut-throat price war between AMD and Intel that should benefit consumers.

 

[DeaconFrost]

Yep, it depends 100% on what you are doing with the computer. My users mainly run Office products, and barely strain the Core 2 Duos that are in their Dell towers. I do video encoding with Handbrake, which definitely benefits from more cores, and why I upgraded from an E8400 to a Q9550. It's a shame to have the E8400 sitting on a shelf, but the Quad Core is much faster for my uses. Some games are quad core aware too, so again, it all depends on what you do with the system.

So, based on that, you might be doing yourself a favor by upgrading, or you could do yourself a favor by saving the money towards a total upgrade down the line.

 

[bilzmale]

Thanks for the feedback - I didn't realise it was so software dependant. The 'heaviest' software I use would be Photoshop CS4. Lightroom 3, audio ripping to flac with EAC and video processing with Nero and Daemon Tools. Would any of these benefit?

 

[DeaconFrost]

Without any real research, I'd say yes. I believe Photoshop CS4 is multi-core aware, and so is Lightroom 3. I could be wrong.

 

[alphanumeric]

Before you go out and buy a new processor make sure it's supported by your motherboard. I have an M2N68-AM SE2 with an Athlon II X4 620. I bought it as a bare bones PC and I'm quit happy with it. I am going to slowly update it as time goes on. I plan on upgrading to a Phenom II processor for the level 3 cache and a little more clock speed. The big thing for me is my motherboard will only support a 95 watt processor. I think that pretty well rules out going 6 core for me. If you go to the downloads for your mother board on the ASUS web site you should be able to find a CPU support list. That will also tell you what BIOS level you need. If a BIOS flash is required to support your new CPU you'll want to do it before you swap them.

 

[bilzmale]

I have the same MB but am upgrading to a 785/710 chipset MB that will tale my AM2 cpu and allow future upgrade to AM3. I'm doing it a bit at a time like you, new case this time round and an extra internal HDD.

 

[alphanumeric]

For me it's more RAM first, then an upgrade from my IDE hard drive to a SATA hard drive or maybe a new CPU. It just depends on how much money I can save and if a good sale happens to show up.

 

[RST101]

It's not about faster speeds and what can handle what. I think the main advantage of having more cores is the ability to multi task much better. It only stands to reason really as the cpu is the brain of our systems, forever receiving and giving feedback so if you have got four/six brains the more efficient the multitasking will be.

 

[DeaconFrost]

It only stands to reason really as the cpu is the brain of our systems, forever receiving and giving feedback so if you have got four/six brains the more efficient the multitasking will be.

Assuming you are using software that's able to use four cores over one or two. For example, many games in the past few years won't perform any better on a Quad2Core than a similar clock speed Core2Duo. Those extra two cores sit idle. With something like Handbrake, you can see a nearly 50% drop in encoding times because those two extra cores will be fully utilized. I saw this first hand when I switch from an E8400 to a Q9550. My Handbrake times dropped dramatically, but yet most gaming scores remained roughly the same.

 

[stormy13]

I have the same MB but am upgrading to a 785/710 chipset MB that will tale my AM2 cpu and allow future upgrade to AM3. I'm doing it a bit at a time like you, new case this time round and an extra internal HDD.

Which board, as most of the 785/710 boards are AM3 and DDR3 only?

 

[RST101]

It only stands to reason really as the cpu is the brain of our systems, forever receiving and giving feedback so if you have got four/six brains the more efficient the multitasking will be.

Assuming you are using software that's able to use four cores over one or two. For example, many games in the past few years won't perform any better on a Quad2Core than a similar clock speed Core2Duo. Those extra two cores sit idle. With something like Handbrake, you can see a nearly 50% drop in encoding times because those two extra cores will be fully utilized. I saw this first hand when I switch from an E8400 to a Q9550. My Handbrake times dropped dramatically, but yet most gaming scores remained roughly the same.

Sorry for the confusion here squire but I was referring to the fact quads are able to perform several duties at once and not just a single application.

 

[Lordbob75]

It only stands to reason really as the cpu is the brain of our systems, forever receiving and giving feedback so if you have got four/six brains the more efficient the multitasking will be.

Assuming you are using software that's able to use four cores over one or two. For example, many games in the past few years won't perform any better on a Quad2Core than a similar clock speed Core2Duo. Those extra two cores sit idle. With something like Handbrake, you can see a nearly 50% drop in encoding times because those two extra cores will be fully utilized. I saw this first hand when I switch from an E8400 to a Q9550. My Handbrake times dropped dramatically, but yet most gaming scores remained roughly the same.

Sorry for the confusion here squire but I was referring to the fact quads are able to perform several duties at once and not just a single application.

That is the theory, but to be honest, I have never seen it used like that.

Then again, my use with 4 or 5 FF windows and iTunes running doesn't even stress core 0.
Though I have noticed that minimizing certain games will kick CPU core 3 through to about 80%. And other games see a rise in all cores.
Then again, I think this is because the mobo, CPU, and OS know to swap tasks amongst cores.

Either way, there is an advantage to them. Most average users would not notice a huge jump though.

~Lordbob

 

[alphanumeric]

I have the same MB but am upgrading to a 785/710 chipset MB that will tale my AM2 cpu and allow future upgrade to AM3. I'm doing it a bit at a time like you, new case this time round and an extra internal HDD.

Which board, as most of the 785/710 boards are AM3 and DDR3 only?

Thats a good point, I had to read up on that. I thought it was all back wards compatible, but it is and it isn't. AM3 CPU's like mine can handle DDR2 and DDR3 and work in a AM2+ or AM3 socket motherboard. AM2 CPU's like the OPs can only handle DDR2 and therefore won't work in an AM3 socket motherboard. It's good for me, my motherboard is AM2+ and my CPU is AM3, not so good for bilzmale. He has the same motherboard but an AM2 CPU.

 

[DeaconFrost]

That is the theory, but to be honest, I have never seen it used like that.

Exactly.

Sorry for the confusion here squire but I was referring to the fact quads are able to perform several duties at once and not just a single application.

Sorry to say, squire, it doesn't always work as it should in theory. In theory, two multi-threaded apps could use two cores each, and be just as fast as a dual core, but be able to finish two tasks rather than one. In theory. However, it rarely, if ever works this way. If you have a Quad Core, fire up two intensive apps, and you'll likely see they aren't splitting the cores in half for each job. What you'll likely see in your usage graphs is that all four cores are in use in vastly different percentages.