Should I go Dual Core or Quad Core? Intel C2 DUO E6850 vs. Quad-Core Q6600

What about the new Intel Penryn range due out soon. Have you considered one
of them?


"Matt" wrote in message
...
Hey guys. I'm looking at upgrading my PC and I've come across an
interesting problem:

- Pay £165 for a Intel Dual Core E6850 (clocked @ 3.0GHz)

- Pay £160 for a Quad Core Q6600 (clocked @ 2.4GHz)

Now to my untrained eye, the quad-core seems like an easy choice. Am I
correct, or is the performance benefit from the 2 additional cores
completely lost by the low bandwidth connection between the 2 dies, as
mentioned in a Wikipedia article below:

"A quad-core CPU (as a two-die set in particular), however, can rarely
double the processing ability of each of its constituent halves (e.g.
the Kentsfield rarely doubles the ability of the Conroe), due to a
loss
of performance resulting from connecting them (i.e. sharing the narrow
memory bandwidth, and operating system overhead of handling twice as
many cores and threads)."

Will all applications for Windows eventually become multi-threaded and
fully utilise a quad core setup? Because if so then surely the 2.4GHz
quad core would outperform the 3.0GHz dual core in the future?

Basically this comes down to dual core vs. quad core, and I'm hoping
there's a clear consensus about which to buy!

Kind Regards,

Matt

"Fred" wrote...
What about the new Intel Penryn range due out soon. Have you considered
one of them?

If you always wait to consider a computer part "due out soon," you'll never
buy ANYTHING!

"Consider" what's available now, but with an eye to upgradability (when the
now-future stuff is available and cheaper). P35 and X38 chipsets should
accommodate the 45nm stuff coming out...

Matt wrote:
Fred wrote:
What about the new Intel Penryn range due out soon. Have you
considered one of them?

I haven't heard about them, however won't a new CPU be considerably
more expensive for the first few months of its life?

Intel were supposed to be releasing a new range of cpu's based on a 45nm
manufacturing process next Monday but it looks like they have delayed things
for a month or two.
The new range offer similar performance at corresponding frequencies to what
is currently available but with lower power consumption.
The current range is expected to be phased out over the next 12 months
One major difference will be a new SSE4.1 instruction set that will speed up
video work in supported applications.
As far as prices go I remember the last product release changed what was the
best bang for buck in the Intel range.
For a general idea of what is on offer visit this translated page.
http://66.249.91.104/translate_c?hl=...171%26page%3D1

John Weiss wrote:
"Fred" wrote...
What about the new Intel Penryn range due out soon. Have you
considered one of them?

If you always wait to consider a computer part "due out soon," you'll
never buy ANYTHING!

IMHO sometimes it is a bad time to buy.
February should bring a next generation of Intel cpu's and quite possibly
lower prices.


"Consider" what's available now, but with an eye to upgradability
(when the now-future stuff is available and cheaper). P35 and X38
chipsets should accommodate the 45nm stuff coming out...

In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt "Fred" wrote:

John Weiss wrote:
"Fred" wrote...
What about the new Intel Penryn range due out soon. Have you
considered one of them?

If you always wait to consider a computer part "due out soon," you'll
never buy ANYTHING!

IMHO sometimes it is a bad time to buy.
February should bring a next generation of Intel cpu's and quite possibly
lower prices.

There's the new AMD quad-cores out right now ....

--
_____
/ ' / â„¢
,-/-, __ __. ____ /_
(_/ / (_(_/|_/ / _/ _

Frank McCoy wrote:
In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt "Fred" wrote:

John Weiss wrote:
"Fred" wrote...
What about the new Intel Penryn range due out soon. Have you
considered one of them?

If you always wait to consider a computer part "due out soon,"
you'll never buy ANYTHING!

IMHO sometimes it is a bad time to buy.
February should bring a next generation of Intel cpu's and quite
possibly lower prices.

There's the new AMD quad-cores out right now ....

True and from what I have read the reason Intel have delayed their launch of
the new range is because of the hardware bug in the AMD quad-cores.
It must make the AMD offering less of a threat to their market share.

Erratum degrades Phenom 9500, 9600 performance
http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/13724

Fred wrote:
Frank McCoy wrote:
In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt "Fred" wrote:

John Weiss wrote:
"Fred" wrote...
What about the new Intel Penryn range due out soon. Have you
considered one of them?

If you always wait to consider a computer part "due out soon,"
you'll never buy ANYTHING!

IMHO sometimes it is a bad time to buy.
February should bring a next generation of Intel cpu's and quite
possibly lower prices.

There's the new AMD quad-cores out right now ....

True and from what I have read the reason Intel have delayed their
launch of the new range is because of the hardware bug in the AMD
quad-cores. It must make the AMD offering less of a threat to their market
share.

Erratum degrades Phenom 9500, 9600 performance
http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/13724

Anyhow the local pc shop here in Australia has just got stock of the
E8500 3.16GHz 6 MB cache for $349 Australian
and the E8400 3.0GHz 6 MB cache for $249
compared to existing
E6750 2.66GHz 4 MB cache $220
E6850 3.0GHz 4MB cache $328
So here at least the new 3.0GHz c2d is cheaper than the old 3.0GHz cpu
Picture of retail packaging here.
http://www.itsky.com.au/assets/catalog/parts/e8400.jpg