Quote:
Originally Posted by g__day
Well I took the plunge and migrated from a dual core Conroe2 to quad core E6600 Go version -
|
I think you mean Q6600.
Quote:
|
I tried loading the biggest, most demanding game I own (S.T.A.L.K.E.R.) whilst doing a virus scan and copying 200 GB of data to my PC. Perfomance was silk smooth - and I mean silky running the game at a 1900 * 1200 with anti-aliasing on!
|
Sounds good, although as another poster said, Crysis is the new benchmark, although it's more GPU than CPU dependant. Also CPU won't help with anti-aliasing as inferred above.. it's all down to the video card. Which card do you have?
Quote:
|
I must say if you can avoid the pain of data loss I suffered, then these platforms can really stand to make a difference in processing time. For a well written application (re-entrant code using queues) its like I'm siting on a 10 GHz cpu which costs under $300.
|
Not sure what you mean here, but sounds like you're enjoying your new CPU
Quote:
|
Many folk here considered quad core yet?
|
Yes, I bought my C2D E6600 some months back (along with just about everything else, including 8800GTX video card) with a view to going Quad core when games like BioShock and Crysis came out. BioShock runs like a dream anyway, but Crysis could probably use the extra cores (although not as much as you might think.. mainly during lots of physics computations). A dedicated physics card might make more sense though
But if you're into intensive non-gaming applications such as photoshop, then more cores is good.