Help me in assembling a Dual-core Machine

[Ankur Gupta]

So u people donot recommend me to go for dual core! and of course i am buying the AMD monster for 26,500!! i thought dual core didnot have heating issues therefore it was introduced?

 

[Ankur Gupta]

oh sorry i forgot to mention the NOT before buying AMD monster :-O

 

[Ankur Gupta]

oh sorry i forgot to mention the NOT before "buying AMD monster"

 

[hummer]

lord wha r u doin? there is an edit button on top of ur post .use it!!!
ya the bottom line is as gx mentioned go fr AMD 3500+ and overclock.
2 yrs down u can buy that dual core.
that way u save some money and the system ll still b a monster.
i don suggest intel coz i m amd fan.

 

[Ankur Gupta]

alright then its final i am goin wid amd athlon64 3500+ Venice with Asus A8N-E motherboard, & 1 GB kingston RAM.thanx a lot for guidin me!!!!!!

 

[rachitboom2]

And you can buy some other gaget from the money you save from this config !!!

 

[Kniwor]

unless u need to work on workstation application, u don't need or benifit from dual core, no games are optimised for it either

if possible, get a Athlon64 3800+ X2, but if u can live without dual core, then get Athlon64 3500+ & Overclock

not all true... even if u're running no multithreaded apps there are many apps running at a time... consider a case when there's a 1.8Gnz core to do everything .... and u're playing a game... it has more to do than just running a game... bu if u have dual core... 1 core can take care of everything else and 1 core will run ur game with it's full power... so basically i dont think this arguement makes much of a sense to argue that dual cores are not useful.... when they improve performance... when u run ur system ex it it's 3200+ than u have a small lag when u switch between heavy apps.. but not with X23800+ which basically has 2 3200+ tigether...

Aother note... Intel dual cores might seem to be cheap but a poor performers... so there's not point getting them right now...
and the cores communicate via external fsb... so even calling them "dual cores" is not right...

 

[hummer]

k i admit that in a senario like u hv mentioned, eg. burnin a cd while playin a game or may b something thing else, there ll b diffrence. that ways there ll dif in bench marks 2. but the thing is i don thing u can play 2 really processor intensive app at 1 time. certainly u cant play doom3 n quake 4 at the same time. or run a game and a video editin app at the same time. so practically dual cores ll hv distinct edge in multithreaded app only.
wha say?

 

[gxsaurav]

well, windows itself is an OS, but to run windows XP U don't need the full 2 GHz of A cpu like athlon64 3200+

the thing is the usage of windows eats a lot less CPU resources, so even if u r using a single core CPU, which for general desktop usage, & gaming is what i prefer over the premium of Dual core

when it comes to Workstation tasks, go for Dual core, that what i still say, for everything else, there is single core, buy dual core only after 2 years

 

[Aniruddh]

at this point of time going for a dual core is not worth.better go for AMD64 3200+ or 3500+ thats more than enough for almost all kind of work.

 

[rachitboom2]

Can anybody mention any software which currently supports Dual core processing except for workstation tasks ???

 

[Adhip007]

I agree with Hummer. I have to upgrade my system every year.

 

[yogi7272]

hmm... dual core does help when ur multitasking .. its a proven fact by many reviewers on the net .. no arguing there .. right now intel dual core seems cheap but its performance is not that earth shattering and also it suffers from heating issues of prescott .. while amd dual core does perform but it costs a bomb .. so no point in getting a dual core right now unless ur very rich ..

also I think most people will go for dual core next year same time .. so no waiting for 2 years .. cos intel is going to release new processors based on brand new architecture ... also vista will be releasing at the same time ..

so most wise decision now will be to get a good mobo which supports both dual and single core processors .. and get a decent single core processor .. intel or amd as per ur choice and liking ..

having said that intel is going to release 65 nm dual core processors code named presler .. range - 2.8 to 3.4 ghz .. so will 945 chipset mobos support presler ? also will new processors based on next gen architecture support 945 mobos ?

anyone ? pls guide ...

 

[Ankur Gupta]

at this point of time going for a dual core is not worth.better go for AMD64 3200+ or 3500+ thats more than enough for almost all kind of work.

Wat bout AMD 3800+ X2 and AMD 4200+ X2 processors are they not worth considerin at this time?how tey perform any idea?wat r their prices?is AMD 3800+X2 better thn AMD 4000+?

 

[Aniruddh]

X2 3800+ cost around 20k and X2 4200+ around 26k if u can afford it than get it otherwise get a 3500+ which shud come around 11k and at present it will suffice all ur needs and later after few months get a dual core proc as the price will surely come down.get a good mobo like ASUS A8NE,MSI K8N NEO4 Platinum or DFI lanparty Ultra.