SA Footy

I've been looking to get a new PC and I just can't get a grip of all this duo, quad core stuff and to what is a faster processor.
Is an F8550 quicker than a E8500 ?
Back in the day, I knew that a 2.33 was faster than a 1.33 but now I havent got a clue.
I recently loooked on EBAY and got the following. Intel Core2 Duo E8500 3.16G Equal to 6.32G Pentium 4.
Now if there was a table where I could see these new processors saying that this is equal to a P4 6.32g etc, I'd be much more happier with my choice.
Has anyone come across something that can help please as I've had a look with no success.

Pentium x1
Core 2 Duo x2
Quad Core x4

That's how you equate them simply....

But then you have to think about what software you will be using and if it supports dual core, or quad core technology

As I understand it Quad Core doesn't have a lot on Dual core if anything because of current limitations.

Westsider is right in his summary smithy hence why a duo core 3.16 = 6.32, its simply 2 3.16ghz processers.
BUT I would take that with a grain of salt as it defnately wouldn't give you double the results/speed.

If you're looking at value for money go for a decent dual core, if you've got some money to splash then go quad core. By the time Quad Core becomes the main spec for machines you'd probably have to replace or upgrade just about everything that comes with your current Quad Core machine anyway IMHO.

Dual CPU desktop systems weren't twice as fast as single CPU desktop systems. But they were a substantial, worthwhile speed bump. With quad CPU systems, we've hit the point of diminishing returns.

Unless you're often running a specific application that is optimized for multithreading, there's no compelling reason to run out and buy a quad-CPU desktop system today. And I don't see that advice changing over the next few years. At least, not until the state of software development changes quite radically to embrace multithreading across the board.

Smithy, it is a very confusing world indeed.

Firstly, what am I going to use this beast for? What operating system? 32 or 64-bit? What applications will I be running? This will give some indication of the quantum of the computing package you require.

Next we start selecting technologies. There a lots of things to consider just selecting the CPU, let alone the motherboard, memory, video, etc, etc.

Then there's manufacturer, ie. intel vs AMD for CPU ... then there's chipsets, etc, etc

But to help answer your question, have a look at this intel CPU ratings chart -> http://www.intel.com/consumer/rating.ht ... tar-rating

There's also AMD CPUs which adds to the confusion ... here's some info -> http://products.amd.com/en-us/compariso ... opCPU.aspx

The advice from the others is correct, dual core is effectively 2x processor speed, quad core is 4x. I personally wouldn't go higher than a dual (duo) core CPU.

For what it's worth, for home I personally build PCs to my spec taking into account the every changing technology out there from a cost of ownership perepective.

So I don't select a particular CPU for instance, but a class of CPU and find the corresponding motherboard that will suit. Again a personal preference, but I use the 'buy the worst house in the best street' mentality, which means I will generally go for the lower spec CPU but a much higher spec motherboard that can accomodate technology for the next 2-3 years. So if we're talking intel here, I'd go for the cheapest motherboard (for around $100) that could accomodate intel E & Q series CPUs, which would include Pentium, Duo and Quad core CPUs, then you have a choice of a Pentuim E5000 series Pentium, Duo E7000 or E8000 series, or Quad Q6000, Q8000, Q9300+ series CPU (start at around $100 up to $400+).

So if I want to upgrade I try to avoid as much as I can having to buy a new motherboard/CPU/RAM combination 'cause the 3 have to work together.

The other take it or leave it advice is not to get sucked into buying the latest and greatest because you will burn big holes in your pocket. That little extra to get the next model up or 2 CPU is highly unlikely to make any real performance difference.

I hope this helps, if not, sorry for confusing you further.

Read up on Whirlpool

There are sections there with people posting current "budget, mid range and high end PCs" as far as value and quality go. It's an extremely good guide to go on.

All 4 replies have helped me SO much in understanding how it all works now.
Thanks heaps to everyone.
VERY much appreciated.

Forget it.

Pentium 4 or nothing...

Lies, lies...

If your software is not designed to take advantage of multi-threading, or you don't do anything that requires multi-threading, then good old fashioned clock speed is what matters.
Using striped Raptors as the C drive has sped up my old AMD64 3000+ considerably.
My next change will be to Windows 7 on an SSD when large enough SSD HDD's are affordable...

For ordinary use, multi-core is just hype.
Products are dropped from the market not when they are out-performed, but when they get so cheap the profit on selling each one is not enough.

Processor speed.

P4 3.0 ghs +.....

Anything Duo is fake....

In my oppinion.

A mis-representation.

Thanks for the rational and scientific response Dog_ger.

Dog_ger wrote:Processor speed.

P4 3.0 ghs +.....

Anything Duo is fake....

In my oppinion.

A mis-representation.

It's not fake.
Just need to understand what it means.


It's like a 50x CD Burner. It doesn't burn at 50x a 1x burner. i t spins at 50x