Number of Cores Info
- Thread starter Deagonx
- Start date
Multi-core processor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I personally can answer for you but I think Wiki explains it much better, and yes a quad is most likely better then majority of dual cores, depends what it is..
I personally can answer for you but I think Wiki explains it much better, and yes a quad is most likely better then majority of dual cores, depends what it is..
~Darkseeker~
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,494
- Location
- Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom
Depends on many things. There are some mega duals and some terrible quads. For example, the Core 2 Duo and the Athlon X4.
Two processors are never virtually identical unless they are exactly the same model. There are alot of variables (e.g. core frequency, number of threads as compared to number of cores, efficiency of architecture, thermal properties) that affect how 'good' a processor it. Besides that, most programs aren't optimised for Quad-core chips anyway; in those circumstances the dual will be as good if not better.
Two processors are never virtually identical unless they are exactly the same model. There are alot of variables (e.g. core frequency, number of threads as compared to number of cores, efficiency of architecture, thermal properties) that affect how 'good' a processor it. Besides that, most programs aren't optimised for Quad-core chips anyway; in those circumstances the dual will be as good if not better.
Rackmountsales
Baseband Member
- Messages
- 86
I most prefer Dual Core for me because I do only one thing at a time, and generally don't listen to music that much. However, if you have three things going at the same time, Go Dual Core. It's just that simple. It should be pointed out that the Quad Core is capable of devoting two cores to the same task, if necessary, so I suppose a Quad Core would work for me. Dual Core is becoming so Pentium III, out-dated, and no longer needed.
