PC gurus, speak to me

GlobalExplorer · 10-18-08, 02:19 PM

Neal I fixed that.

I don't agree with Subman here, if you get a quadcore now you also need a more expensive mainboard and you will not see a performance increase in your games. Quadcores run desktop applications faster (photoshop, compression, etc), but seriously, a Pentium 4 or Athlon is already more than sufficient for desktop applications.

There might be a benefit in one or two years but right now you will not find many games that make full use of two cores, let alone four. I personally expect multicores to develop their full potential only when the next generation of operating systems and compilers arrives, i.e. in the next years.

There is of course no reason not to get one. But for games it's not really worth the money imo. If you are a scientist who runs earthquake simulations every day this might be a different situation.

10-18-08, 02:19 PM	#11
GlobalExplorer Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Location: Berlin Posts: 2,015 Downloads: 165 Uploads: 0	Neal I fixed that. I don't agree with Subman here, if you get a quadcore now you also need a more expensive mainboard and you will not see a performance increase in your games. Quadcores run desktop applications faster (photoshop, compression, etc), but seriously, a Pentium 4 or Athlon is already more than sufficient for desktop applications. There might be a benefit in one or two years but right now you will not find many games that make full use of two cores, let alone four. I personally expect multicores to develop their full potential only when the next generation of operating systems and compilers arrives, i.e. in the next years. There is of course no reason not to get one. But for games it's not really worth the money imo. If you are a scientist who runs earthquake simulations every day this might be a different situation. __________________