Dual Core or not to Dual Core

[Professor S]

I've been researching for a new PC lately and I came accross a bit of a conundrum. Dual Core processing is all the rage now, but I've also heard that its not necessarily the best option for a gaming PC. So I did a little research and I came accross this helpful article:

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=261

Apparently dual core processors are only really better than single cores when the software is built to use two processors (SMP). So my question is this to those of you who are computer savvy:

Are game developers working SMP into their programming or are they basically ignoring this as a fad? I want to know if the extra cost is going to be worth it down the road or if I'd be better off getting an AMD FX chip instead.

On a side note: SLI. Is going Quad all that great?

[The Duggler]

Also consider 64 bit processing as Vista is on it's way.

[Xantar]

From what I understand, individual chips are starting to top out. There's a limit to how much smaller you can make transistors, and sooner or later the law of diminishing returns is going to go into effect. So lots of computers are going multi-processor (or multi-core). It's also true of consoles. The Xbox 360 and the PS3 both use multiple processors to achieve their gains.

So I'd say no, it's not a fad. Developers are getting really annoyed because writing code for those machines is complicated, but by and large they don't seem to think it's going away.

On the other hand, a dual-core computer won't help your gaming much yet. It might let you run other programs at the same time as your game, but that's about it.

[Professor S]

Well, I guess if its not going away devlopers are going to have to start coding for multiple cores. I'm planning on investing A LOT in this new PC (my last build estimated at around $4,500), so I don't want it to be obsolete for at least 5 years or more. So I guess dual core it is.

Also consider 64 bit processing as Vista is on it's way.

Nitram, please explain. I have no clue what you're talking about.

[Jonbo298]

Vista will take advantage of 64-bit processing whcih means things are done alot quicker.

Go Dual Core if you want to "future proof" yourself. Go SLI/Crossfire. Its a way to set yourself up for years to come. Heck, I'm still running on an Athlon XP 2500 at 3100 speeds (mobo hates 3200 speed for some odd reason) and a 9800Pro from 2003/early 2004 and it still kicks good enough in new games. Can't turn everything on but it still plays them very well, considering I do have 2 gigs of ram :p

But yeah, as said, go Dual Core. Though right now its not used as much, Intel and AMD WILL go dual, triple, etc..et.c..cores in the future. and companies will show the advantage of dual vs single when the software is used right.

[The Duggler]

Nitram, please explain. I have no clue what you're talking about.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2830

[Null]

Also consider 64 bit processing as Vista is on it's way.
both the FX and Duel core hes talking about are 64bit.
he doesnt really have to worry about that with the ones he's thinking about.






and go duel core, i've never heard that great of things about the FX series anyway. soon more and more programs are going to be coded for 64bit and duel core anyway. especially with vista changing things up a little.

[MrCoffee]

um
so i didnt read the link but, dual core wont be good for awhile...but get a dualcore ready mobo...

[Jonbo298]

Why is dual core bad? Please enlighten me even in its current state that dual core isnt good compared to single core. FX series may seem to be better for current processes but when dual core gets taken advantage of, all the comments about FX series being great and grand, will be shot down.

[Professor S]

Thanks a lot guys, the info and the link were a big help.

Now on the SLI. How much of a difference is there going from double to quad? The price difference is CONSIDERABLE and I don't want to risk it if either 1) Its like buying a yacht to cross a creek when a dingy will do or 2) The PC architecture won't know what to do with it all.

[Jonbo298]

Quad-SLI, while nice I think is more of a money machine for Nvidia. The performance is noticeable but only if you go above 1600x1200. Below that I've seen it be on-par with Ati's Crossfire. So...unless you plan to constantly run resolutions very high, Quad-SLI, in my opinion is more of a waste of money for bragging rights.

[Professor S]

Quad-SLI, while nice I think is more of a money machine for Nvidia. The performance is noticeable but only if you go above 1600x1200. Below that I've seen it be on-par with Ati's Crossfire. So...unless you plan to constantly run resolutions very high, Quad-SLI, in my opinion is more of a waste of money for bragging rights.

Thats exactly what I was thinking it was: A lot of show for little "go".

Thanks a lot guys, I think I'm even going to sticky this thread because there is a TON of good information on it for people considering a new gaming PC.

[MrCoffee]

Why is dual core bad? Please enlighten me even in its current state that dual core isnt good compared to single core. FX series may seem to be better for current processes but when dual core gets taken advantage of, all the comments about FX series being great and grand, will be shot down.

Its not bad its just useless, Im running a it and its the same as regular process nothing really takes advantage of it yet, so just wait for it to go cheaper and become useful :)

[Null]

because if your going to spend the money, why not spend it on something thats going to last longer and have a bigger future?

i mean unless its a huge difference in price, which its really not. buy something else now and wait for it to be cheaper and then get it? you'll still be spending more then you woulda to just get it now. and later be like, i wish i had a duel core.. duel core now will just last you longer, better buy in the long run.

fairly soon it will be used. games are going to start using it to run phisics and AI on its own without getting a phisics card.

[Jonbo298]

Its not bad its just useless, Im running a it and its the same as regular process nothing really takes advantage of it yet, so just wait for it to go cheaper and become useful :)

But he's planning to keep this computer for up to 5 years if needed. In the next year there should be more things using dual core because its the way Intel and AMD have to go. Its a matter of Microsoft getting Vista out for people to see a first major diff between single and dual

[GameMaster]

My Core Duo Mac Mini can distribute it's labor among my two processors. Olé!

[Happydude]

personally, i would go dual core for the future, i mean, if i plan to invest a lot of money in a computer that i would like to last as long as possible, i might as well go all out instead of swapping components in the future and paying more than i would pay just buying the best of the best now. (as null said)

and as for quad SLI, i think it's a waste. just go crossfire or SLI with 2 cards, which will cost you quite a bit cheaper and a physx card (once again, for the future) which will cost you the difference in price between dual and quad SLIs.