[Badger]

So right now, I'm in the process of saving up to build myself a new rig. I haven't built a PC in ages, so I'm way out of the loop, especially with the new multi-core CPUs. From what I've been reading, most games can't take advantage of quad-core, and most of the benefit is in AI behaviour (which of course is irrelevant with an MMORPG, since the AI load for the CPU is all server-side). On the other hand, quad-core sounds sexy and shiny.

The reviews are all mixed, so what's the word about genuine performance improvement in MMORPGs with quad core?

[Jump]

There getting cheap and it can't hurt. I guess the thing is do you think games and other apps will utilize it in the near future? Windows uses it and it is nice when I am working in Photoshop and have 30 browser windows that I forgot open and email is fetching, etc. I think a quality video card is more of a priority though.

[Badger]

See, that's what I keep hearing. It's great if you have a bunch of threads running, but programmers just aren't breaking up the programs right. The still picture processing power is awesome for something like Maya or photoshop. But I'm a pretty artless cretin, so those kind of benefits are lost on me. It's probably going to make more sense just to buy a dual core.

I'm wondering how much overkill the new games like Jumpgate Evolution will build in. Meaning, will the highest texture/graphics/horizon settings be able to tax a quad core with good graphics card. I really hope so...I want Jumpgate Evolution to look beautiful, and it'll give me an excuse to build a kickass rig.

[Jump]

I don't think Jumpgate Evolution will need much to look good. I wouldn't build a system for just one game though.

[netburnr]

Personally I would say save the money on the CPU/mobo and go dual core and go with a better graphics card. then once programmers figure out a way to untilize the multiple cores more, then upgrade to quad.

I love my dual core, and its more than enough for everything I do.

[Milkman]

I also would have to agree with do with Dual core instead of quad unless your really putting that PC to use. Also of note, if you have x amount of money to spend on a CPU the individual cores will be slower with larger multi core CPUs. Example...

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 each core runs at 3Ghz Price $279
Newegg.com - Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor - Retail

Intel Core2 Quad 6600 each core runs at 2.4Ghz Price $279
Newegg.com - Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz 2 x 4MB L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor - Retail

So.. if you have any older programs that only uses 1 core your quad machine will very likely run it slower than your dual core machine.

[netburnr]

I've got the 6600 Dual Core, of coarse I paid a lot more since this was awhile ago when I upgraded.

It even overclocks very nicely, however I keep it at the stock speed.

[Lordopic]

Unless your doing heavy Photoshop etc stuff which your not go with a Dual Core if you need more Umff over clock it the Duals are a over clockers friend ( just don’t go mad with out a decent fan/case/airflow)

As other have pointed out for the cost of some of the Quads safe the cash and spread it around on a better MB, memory or GPU.

[Badger]

But...but...quad is more than duo. It's like, twice as much. And shiny too. I want the shiny!!

Wah.

Yeah, I guess I'll probably get duo in the end. I'll spend the extra money on some sweet RAM sticks. Maybe once I get around a terabyte of RAM, vista will run as fast as XP.