BF2S Forums Uber Single Core or Decent Multi Core?

Don't even think about a single core.

TBH I'd be looking at the G0 Q6600, buy an after market cooler and overclock it, or clock it to about 3 - 3.2Ghz on the stock cooler.

I want offensive karma, I feel left out

RandomSchl wrote:

dual core, more and more games are using two cores now.

even the game explicitly is not using both cores you are getting th benefit of other os process using them.

I was snooping down that road. If your comparing a 3.4 ht extreme ( the fastest 478 ) to even a e6750, just go the 6750.
I guarantee you if you spend your money, youll curse everyone else has new pc, now your broke and pretty much stuck doing the same thing.

That being said, yes i have a 3.4 w/2gb on a good motherboard to overclock ( abit ic7 max III ) and yes it does run a lot of things well, but its no system that is going to handle what is coming out NEW in the next 3 years, ALL OF IT is made for dual core. Its no secret the industry are weening out single core altogether, i am still surprised the high price the extreme p4s go for on ebay, its only because of the high demand that is still around..
second of all pcie is just as an improtant technological advance to our systems as dual core lately, thats probably the biggest reason to make the switch, agp cards are too expensive. and half the bandwidth output.

Yup that's me, and building a rig with the purpose of running old games is just plain silly.

BTW, you just have to set the core affinity then they run like they always have.

buy cheap dual core and overclock it to high-end...

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

Yup that's me, and building a rig with the purpose of running old games is just plain silly.

BTW, you just have to set the core affinity then they run like they always have.

I like to play my older game that I've bought, silly? No. (This isn't a mac...) Anyways, I know that you can set the core affinity each and every time you start a program, but that gets annoying, fast. I could make batch files for the shortcut to set the affinity, but I never got around to it.

Fine, buy a dual core but be aware that some programs don't like dual core, at all, and that you will have to set the core affinity on most every older piece of software that you have.

Assumably you want the computer to last you.

The dual core is much more future proof.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007. … ;chart=419

Look at that.



Edit: And to the immature moron who did give me the karma, please realize there is more to life than insulting people anonymously to improve your self-esteem. Being nice gives you a sense of accomplishment and resolves your problem too. (Idiot).

Last edited by nukchebi0 (2007-12-02 22:34:38)

Yes.

Remember: BF2 loading times are very RAM dependent, not CPU.

Last edited by nukchebi0 (2007-12-02 22:36:25)

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

Yeah running on a single core it's still be faster, and all those games run on dual core without setting the affintity (Wolfenstein might need it doing manually), not sure they'll run on a 64bit OS though.

Compatibility mode should fix that, no?

Go with the dual core. I just wanted you to be aware of some of the things that might come up.

mtb0minime wrote:

But this new system will have 4 gigs, hallelujah for cheap RAM!

I would recommend not cutting corners with cheap no-name RAM.

mtb0minime wrote:

Edit: And yeah I'll have to change the settings because of the 64 bit. Like I mentioned, I'll have 4 gigs of RAM, and if I'm not mistaken, 32-bit OS doesn't recognize all of it.

Correct, Windows 32-bit edition will only recognize up to 3.99 GB of RAM.

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

All my old software defaults to core 0, guess that's just me.

Really? Well, for me, not even BF2 would set itself to a single core.

Last edited by {M5}Sniper3 (2007-12-02 22:43:07)