Core 2 Duo vs Core quad!!

[MCAntonio aka AN21]

I think I will upgrade my proccesor(P4 3.4)..I have saved my money, so..I think they are compatible with the motherboard cause in PC Wizard it says in the proccesor tab: Support  LGA 775 so I guess I can fit them, right? I have seen these two:

INTEL CORE 2 DUO E6850 3.00 GHZ LGA775 - 1333 FSB - BOX
                                     vs
INTEL CORE 2 QUAD CORE Q6600 2.40 GHZ LGA775 - 1066 FSB - BOX

One is quad but the other has more hz...What is better? The price is quite similar..Also what is whats the difference between 45nm and 65nm??

Cheers

[spitfire boy]

Basically in laymans terms, a quad-core processor actually contains 4 (hence the quad) processors that can operate together or separately (I think).

Duo is exactly the same except that it has 2 processors instead of 4 (hence the duo).

The computer I have just ordered has a Q6600 2.4GHz for a processor... I THINK (don't quote me here, I'm no expert) that quad-cores in general are regarded as more capable than dual cores.

[MWISimmer]

Make sure your motherboard supports the FSB (1066/1333). P4's usually are 800Mhz so I would be very careful and check before you buy, you may find you'll need a new mobo, TBH I'd be surprised if it will run that fast as P4s are old tech nowadays and the mobo probably is too.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but better to know now than when you've paid out a few quid...

[MCAntonio aka AN21]

Make sure your motherboard supports the FSB (1066/1333). P4's usually are 800Mhz so I would be very careful and check before you buy, you may find you'll need a new mobo, TBH I'd be surprised if it will run that fast as P4s are old tech nowadays and the mobo probably is too.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but better to know now than when you've paid out a few quid...

I know..About ten minutes ago I saw that the FSB is 800Mhz..I guess I will have to buy a new mobo,case,proccesor ..Thats OK..So quads are better in general..

[Mermaid Man]

[
I know..About ten minutes ago I saw that the FSB is 800Mhz..I guess I will have to buy a new mobo,case,proccesor ..Thats OK..So quads are better in general..

Not necassarily. The jump from single to core is noticeable for most users, ie encoding music at 95% CPU load whilst browsing internet, so you still have one core free. On a quad it'll either be quicker (if you set higher priority) or less CPU usage across the board.

Only if the applications support it, and you're doing lots of heavy CPU processes. I think currently it's better to go for a faster dual core, then a slower quad core if gaming is prime computer usage.

Since this forum is about FS, then for the quad to be worthwhile purchase, you'll want it to use all four cores. Once a app is multi-threaded it should work on dual, quad, eight core etc....but if it's only using 10% on each core on a quad it's not making full use of it.

A bit like the hype with Crysis using quads. It doesn't.

[MCAntonio aka AN21]

Thats what they told me here in Greece. Its better to buy a 3 Ghz dual core than a 2.4 quad...I have read somewhere that XP doesn't use all 4 cores? Is it true? If yes then its not worth its money..

[Mermaid Man]

Windows XP Home supports quad core. But not two physical CPU's. You'll need Pro for that

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/high ... icore.mspx

A Intel C2D quad core is supported in XP Home.