[akex]

Hi everyone,

First of all, i'd like to know if it is worth it having a dual/quad core processor if I don't plan on multitasking very much. Are there programs that utilize the full potential of having more than one core?

Also, how important is the speed of the processor in ghz? I was told that AMD 6000+ doesn't perform as well as the intel e6750 but the advertised processor speed for the AMD is higher than that of the intel.

[Advertisements]

Dual-core is the future. Much faster.
As to processor speed, it went out the window years ago. The AMD 6000 is slow compared to the E6750 despite the difference in clock speed but the Intel is just a better chip overall because although it runs slower clock-speed wise, it performs better and also has a bigger what's called cache - cache is a temporary buffer between processor and memory and the bigger the cache, the more it holds. Therefore the bigger the cache and the more data is in the cache, the faster the system can get it second-time round relatively soon after.

[Neil Jones]

Dual-core is the future. Much faster.
As to processor speed, it went out the window years ago. The AMD 6000 is slow compared to the E6750 despite the difference in clock speed but the Intel is just a better chip overall because although it runs slower clock-speed wise, it performs better and also has a bigger what's called cache - cache is a temporary buffer between processor and memory and the bigger the cache, the more it holds. Therefore the bigger the cache and the more data is in the cache, the faster the system can get it second-time round relatively soon after.

[Doctor Inferno]

I would recommend a Core2Duo processor for power saving. And dual core is better.