dual core ore quad core

Aamos · Post by **Aamos** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 6:40 am

hey guys. really want to know what to get.....can anyone give me soms advice... thank's

blank · Post by **blank** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:20 am

I own an intel quad core and i'm pretty happy.

If you have the money

go for it

Casual Beats · Post by **Casual Beats** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 2:25 pm

I have a core 2 duo (with the cores oc'd to 3.4 ghz each). I have yet to even come close to tapping it's potential. Having said that, I agree with Blank - if you have the money (and I think quad cores have dropped quite a bit since I built my machine over a year ago) then go for the quads. This will give you plenty of room to grow down the road.

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:41 pm

The current price point (best price to performance option) is either the C2D E6600 or the Quadcore Q6600 (basically 2xE6600). Check here:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi ... 00&x=0&y=0

As you can see, you'd pay about $50 for two more cores. So the question isn't "should you get it", it's "are you fucking high for not getting the quad?!?!?"

The ONLY advantage is that the E6600 will probably overclock higher than the Q6600, but given that Live can handle multi-cores very well, this is an absolute no-brainer. Get the Quad.

Sales Dude McBoob · Post by **Sales Dude McBoob** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:46 pm

One of the best purchases in my life was buying a dual 1.8 G5 tower back in 2004. If you can afford a Mac Pro quad or an 8-core, do yourself a favor and pick one up.

My G5 hasn't so much as burped in the past 3 years. I shit you not. Flawless operation. I feel like it's going to continue to serve me for many years to come. When it does come time to buy a replacement desktop I will go straight to Apple and buy the most powerful box I can afford.

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:54 pm

Sales Dude McBoob wrote:When it does come time to buy a replacement desktop I will go straight to Apple and buy the most powerful box I can afford.

cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching
cha-ching

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:55 pm

^ and that's just for the ram

Sales Dude McBoob · Post by **Sales Dude McBoob** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:58 pm

http://ramjet.com/macpro.asp

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:05 pm

oh gawd, I was just kidding....geez, did Steve Jobs take your sense of humor along with your cash?

anyways, we all agree, even the lame mac-users

that you need to get the Quad Core!

blank · Post by **blank** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:06 pm

Just make sure you pick a decent motherboard with your quad to be sure all drivers ( let's talk m-audio here) wont encounters any probs with the quad itself.

Asus p5k-se is a good choice afaik, no stupid option like wifi onboard that comes suck your irq every 2 sec and the thing is damn stable.

i'm on it since 2 months with a quad 2.8 ghz and I never had a single crash even if I run my two powercore loaded at the top ( this is heaven).

kb420 · Post by **kb420** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:21 pm

I'm planning on building a system in the next few months, and from the research I have done, a q6600 is the best bang for your buck.

inmazevo · Post by **inmazevo** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:30 pm

Well, for pretty much everything audio/video, more cores = good.
There are exceptions, of course.

Personally, I'm debating whether to get a Q6600 for the current system (Asus P5B), or just save for an 8-core Mac Pro once the prices come down.

In any event, if you're building your own, its hard to imagine current CPU deals better than the Q6600.

Keep in mind, however, that the Penryns are (literally) just around the corner.

- zevo

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:39 pm

If you extrapolate from past Intel behavior, the new Penryns will be hugely expensive, and not much more than about 15% gains in speed. (http://www.behardware.com/news/9102/pen ... -12th.html) Sure, that's a lot of gain, but for literally 5x the cost. Also, Apple has pre-booked most production this year, again to lock in the very high end market.

My suggestion (and also my plan) would be to wait for the Penryn releases, then grab a Q6600 when it hits around $200. Pop that into my current setup, possibly get up to 4gb of ram from 2gb, and start cooking the shit outta L7.

blank · Post by **blank** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:06 pm

nebulae wrote: My suggestion (and also my plan) would be to wait for the Penryn releases, then grab a Q6600 when it hits around $200. Pop that into my current setup, possibly get up to 4gb of ram from 2gb, and start cooking the shit outta L7.

Just to know, are you running xp or vista ?

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:10 pm

I won't run vista till it's performance tweaked...meaning all kinks worked out, driver support reasonably certain, memory hogs put away, etc. And I want to read up on guides like MusicXP.net that tell me how to optimize it for audio. Then, if after all that, there is a significant benefit to Vista, only then will I do it.

I don't need bells and whistles, I just need solid audio performance.