which one?

If you're on a budget, then get the single core one on the bottom. It's nearly $100 difference. That is a lot of money!!! The 3500's are pretty nice. A lot of us use the 3500+ with no significant slowdowns.

I love dual core so I'm willing to pay the extra money to get it, even if I am on a budget.
 
I would think so. The Athlon 64 3500+ is a good decent CPU, but I feel the dual core is even better. If you're the type of person that runs apps all day, game, and surf a lot on the web, the X2 is a great CPU to get. It's an all around good CPU.

The 3500+ is just as capable too, but it can eventually bog down on you when performing a significant amount of multtasking and encoding. With dual core, you're ready for the future. More and more apps and games will be using dual core soon making it faster and more efficient. They keyword is efficiency which results in performance boost.
 
Yeah dual core is in. Single core is of the past. My next upgrade will be no doubt, dual core processing. I'm sure I speak for everyone here that if they have a chance to upgrade to something better, dual core is what they'll get. Unless they want an expensive FX CPU or something like that.
 
go with dual core, so it will last you longer without being outdated. but what will you use it for?
 
TRDCorolla said:
Yeah dual core is in. Single core is of the past. My next upgrade will be no doubt, dual core processing. I'm sure I speak for everyone here that if they have a chance to upgrade to something better, dual core is what they'll get. Unless they want an expensive FX CPU or something like that.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's "of the past", but it isn't going to be around for too much longer. Well, actually, it will be around for a time to come; keep in mind, for some things single core actually has its benefits.
 
Back
Top Bottom