CharmedLover84 Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 Did I say that? No. And in 6 to 8 months I'm sure things will be a lot different as they were 6 to 8 months after people spouted off the same way you just did about Quad Cores, right after dual cores came out. And your arguement ain't very convincing with you being an Intel user, just an FYI Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivaladan Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 due to the quad core overhead, it actually performs slightly slower than the duo equivalant in games. however i would gladly pay that small price (thou not so much the large financial cost) to have the four cores. windows will use all the cores for a start. applications will come eventually. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharmedLover84 Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 And, by the by, since you didn't bother to ask before spouting off about it... I multi-task. A lot. As in all the time. Like right now I have around ten programs running, including IE, AOL, SmartGuardian, a game, Windows Task Manager and a couple IMs. So I'd love to have the extra two cores to place load on. And I'm not going Intel because #1 it'd cost me too much to upgrade and #2 I'm not a fan, probably never will be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flybye Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 Quad cores, like dual cores, were a waste in the beginning. Anyone complaining about dual cores now? I'm sure not. Unreal Tournament 2007 will be supporting multithreading for 2+ cores for sure. And I'm sure newer games will most ceraily have the code, too. Besides, it's not a true waste. There ARE programs like Photoshop, Cinema 4d, video encoding, etc what will take advantage of it. On a side not, I installed the AMD dual core optimization program, and it didn't improve my 3dMark06 at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-CsA-TAZ Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 Did I say that? No. And in 6 to 8 months I'm sure things will be a lot different as they were 6 to 8 months after people spouted off the same way you just did about Quad Cores, right after dual cores came out. And your arguement ain't very convincing with you being an Intel user, just an FYI 6 to 8 months? We are 18 months into dual core and how many games have been written to take full you of dual core? less than 5, as for multi tasking, Like right now I have around ten programs running, including IE, AOL, SmartGuardian, a game, Windows Task Manager and a couple IMs lol is that all, and if you were to close all them down how many more FPS do you think you would get? If you want to play 2 games at the same time then quad core will be just the job, or maybe some video production studio stuff, other wise quad core will have very little impact over single or dual core in most applications, so when you get your Quad core and you dont get any extra FPS or better 3D/06 scores dont say I did tell ya, P.S what does FYI mean? And what disadvantage do ya thing Intel have over what you have? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-CsA-TAZ Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 Quad cores, like dual cores, were a waste in the beginning. Anyone complaining about dual cores now? I'm sure not. Unreal Tournament 2007 will be supporting multithreading for 2+ cores for sure. And I'm sure newer games will most ceraily have the code, too. Besides, it's not a true waste. There ARE programs like Photoshop, Cinema 4d, video encoding, etc what will take advantage of it. On a side not, I installed the AMD dual core optimization program, and it didn't improve my 3dMark06 at all. Not saying its a waste M8 but if its gaming is what you build ur PC for as it main priority then quad core will add nothing more, as did dual core, with the new drivers games do benifit a bit in performance, but not in the same way Unreal Tournament 2007 will take advantage of dual core! E.g the new QX6700 will not beat the X6800 in any FPS benchmark, but it will be alot faster @ decoding stuff and the thing you have all ready mentioned! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flybye Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 Yeah I've been reading reviews on the QX6700. Not very impressive in certain areas, but the programs I mentioned above you easily see performance doubled. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharmedLover84 Posted November 21, 2006 Posted November 21, 2006 6 to 8 months? We are 18 months into dual core and how many games have been written to take full you of dual core? less than 5, as for multi tasking, lol is that all, and if you were to close all them down how many more FPS do you think you would get? If you want to play 2 games at the same time then quad core will be just the job, or maybe some video production studio stuff, other wise quad core will have very little impact over single or dual core in most applications, so when you get your Quad core and you dont get any extra FPS or better 3D/06 scores dont say I did tell ya, P.S what does FYI mean? And what disadvantage do ya thing Intel have over what you have? That's an example of how often I multitask, nothing more. If I had 4 cores, I could do more, along with audio encoding. And having that open doesn't effect my FPS rate. FYI ... if you don't know what that means you shouldn't be allowed to touch a computer. As for your "Disadvantage" comment, I never said it does, although flat out, a Conroe's increase in performance over a FX60 in games is marginal. Everyone's throwin' a fit about them and truth be told, they will fall and fall hard, as every other Intel chip has to AMD in the past. Enjoy your "crown" while it lasts Intel. 6 months out of the last 3 years. Good job Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slagathor Posted November 22, 2006 Posted November 22, 2006 As for your "Disadvantage" comment, I never said it does, although flat out, a Conroe's increase in performance over a FX60 in games is marginal. Everyone's throwin' a fit about them and truth be told, they will fall and fall hard, as every other Intel chip has to AMD in the past. Enjoy your "crown" while it lasts Intel. 6 months out of the last 3 years. Good job Wow, sick 'em Charmed.......:cool: :cool: w0000000t!!!!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thraxz Posted November 22, 2006 Posted November 22, 2006 Her own FEAR thread kinda wounds her credibility. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-CsA-TAZ Posted November 22, 2006 Posted November 22, 2006 That's an example of how often I FYI ... if you don't know what that means you shouldn't be allowed to touch a computer. LOL why is that? Will it limit my ability to play games or even switch it on? Hmm seem to have managed quite well without knowing so.............! As for your "Disadvantage" comment, I never said it does, although flat out, a Conroe's increase in performance over a FX60 in games is marginal. As far as games go yes I agree, but My E6600 can do all your FX60 can @ stock and for half the price, and it does most if not all other non gaming thing way faster! Everyone's throwin' a fit about them and truth be told, they will fall and fall hard, as every other Intel chip has to AMD in the past. Enjoy your "crown" while it lasts Intel. 6 months out of the last 3 years. Good job LOL I have had AMD for the last 3 years M8 and tbh dont really see your point here, this isn’t a fan boy pitch, simple pointing out that Quad core won't do much if anything to improve your gaming score, and it would be better to get urself two 8800 if you want big gains in gaming performance, but as you pointed out you have a need for Quad core let that be that, but as for C2D falling hard? Who are you trying to kid, I had AMD 64 4400+ before this, M8 so I will enjoy the crown for a long time yet! P.S, Sorry for offending you it was not my intention! I shall say no more! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharmedLover84 Posted November 22, 2006 Posted November 22, 2006 LOL why is that? Will it limit my ability to play games or even switch it on? Hmm seem to have managed quite well without knowing so.............! As far as games go yes I agree, but My E6600 can do all your FX60 can @ stock and for half the price, and it does most if not all other non gaming thing way faster! LOL I have had AMD for the last 3 years M8 and tbh dont really see your point here, this isn’t a fan boy pitch, simple pointing out that Quad core won't do much if anything to improve your gaming score, and it would be better to get urself two 8800 if you want big gains in gaming performance, but as you pointed out you have a need for Quad core let that be that, but as for C2D falling hard? Who are you trying to kid, I had AMD 64 4400+ before this, M8 so I will enjoy the crown for a long time yet! P.S, Sorry for offending you it was not my intention! I shall say no more! Okay... for the last time. WHEN. DID I SAY. THAT I THOUGHT THE QUAD CORE WOULD RAISE MY GAMING PERFORMANCE?!? NEVER. That was why I went off on you. I don't like bein' poked at for somethin' I never said. My main point behind wanting a quad core in the first place is the ability to be able to, for example, game, while running a video or audio encode, and have no problems. I'd love to be able to do that, but right now I can't because most games I do play utilize both cores, and if I had an audio/video encode going too, my performance would probably suffer. I have tons of songs (2700+) I'd love to convert to my ultra small great quality MP3 format I have, but I simply don't want to take the time to do it. and getting two 8800GTXs on my current motherboard would most likely be a bigger waste than me spending all the money to upgrade to a Conroe right now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts