[Beta55]

Thinking of getting a new PC in 2 weeks.
Quad Qore or Dual Qore?
I want your honest opinion.
Because people keep telling me "It doesn't matter that much and a lot of games work better on dual-cores"

Well yeah obviously because quad-qores are new hardware.
Kinda like how PS3 turned out, it was hard 2 develop on (people say) but now I'm seeing games like Killzone 2 and God Of War 3.
Basically I'm asking is getting a quad-qore worth it for the future?

[Advertisements]

If all you're going to do is play games, then get whichever has the higher clock speed.

[Troy]

If all you're going to do is play games, then get whichever has the higher clock speed.

[Neil Jones]

Thinking of getting a new PC in 2 weeks.
Quad Qore or Dual Qore?
I want your honest opinion.
Because people keep telling me "It doesn't matter that much and a lot of games work better on dual-cores"

Many games and programs are optimised for dual-core.
While quad-core will be useful in the future, at this point in time it isn't from a gaming perspective. From other uses it will be useful.
Games tend to benefit more from better graphics cards rather than the processor, going on the basis the clock speed of a processor these days is very interesting but totally irrelevant.

[Troy]

I don't think it's irrelevant as there is a bottle neck in any system. There'd be no point in pairing up the latest and greatest graphics card with only an average processor as it would hold you back. The graphics card is waiting on the processor to hurry up. The reverse scenario would also be true.

Many games and programs are optimised for dual-core.

This is true, and with this in mind I posted to get whatever has the highest clock speed. If you can afford a high-clocked quad-core, then the games and programs optimised for dual-core will be able to make use of two of the cores, leaving a bit more room for background processes and future quad-enabled programs.

Otherwise a high-clocked dual-core would crank along nicely as well.

Does that sound okay?

[Neil Jones]

I don't think it's irrelevant as there is a bottle neck in any system. There'd be no point in pairing up the latest and greatest graphics card with only an average processor as it would hold you back. The graphics card is waiting on the processor to hurry up. The reverse scenario would also be true.

The point I was making is that you can have a 3Ghz processor and a 2.4Ghz processor.

The 2.4Ghz processor can easily outperform the 3Ghz processor on the basis it is simply a better processor in other areas.

As a real-world example, the Core 2 Duo 78200 has a clock speed of 2.53Ghz.
Yet it is better than a Core 2 Duo E6850 which has a clock speed of 3Ghz.

It's all very well having quad-core but if you don't do anything that needs quad-core you may as well throw your money down the drain.
Games of the future will make use of quad-core eventually. At the moment they don't. By the time mainstream games do we'll be on the (currently fictional but plausible) Core i15 series with DDR4 memory