Quad core - is it worth it?

[beanzontoast]

Could use some advice here please...

I do a lot of graphics work on my pc and often have several apps running simultaneously. At the moment, my main machine is a dual core Intel 5300 with 3gb memory and my backup is an AMD 2400+ with 2gb. The backup is starting to look slow in comparison, struggles with multi-tasking and makes a lot of noise too (which I've posted about before - it's about 5 years old and owes me nothing).

So what I'm wondering is - if/when I upgrade to a new base unit, is it worth going for a quad core beastie? Will I notice a significant improvement in multi-tasking compared to the dual core I have now? Or should I stick with another dual core as the cheaper option?

 

[2Loose]

>often have several apps running simultaneously.

Yes, you would definitely benefit as each application would use a seperate core if possible, but this does also depend to a degree on the OS you use. XP scales ok, Vista and Windows 7 even better.

Some graphics software scales very well across multiple cores, so the chances are you would benefit even if you only used a single graphics application.

 

[beanzontoast]

>often have several apps running simultaneously.

Yes, you would definitely benefit as each application would use a seperate core if possible, but this does also depend to a degree on the OS you use. XP scales ok, Vista and Windows 7 even better.

Some graphics software scales very well across multiple cores, so the chances are you would benefit even if you only used a single graphics application.

- I'm likely going to be running Xp on one and Windows 7 on the other to start with, becoming Windows 7 on both eventually, so this looks good.

How does memory pan out on a quad core? I see quite a few quad cores being sold with only 2gb memory. Presumably, to get the full benefit of the processor (as compared to my dual core running 3gb memory) I'd need to bump the quad core base's memory up to maybe 4gb?

 

[rh100]

I think XP has an effective limit of 2 or 3GB, although there may be a patch to up this. Found a link here that might be useful to you.

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx

Other limits would be the motherboard - but I would have thought a quad core mobo would be modern enough to handle it - always worth checking before buying though.

 

[marinyork]

Er, which particular AMD are you running? If you're running what I think you will you'll get a gigantic speed increase. Later core 2s will thrash the 5300. Unfortunately things like i7s cost a lot of money. Things like Athlon II X4 are fairly cheap.

 

[2Loose]

How does memory pan out on a quad core? I see quite a few quad cores being sold with only 2gb memory. Presumably, to get the full benefit of the processor (as compared to my dual core running 3gb memory) I'd need to bump the quad core base's memory up to maybe 4gb?

2Gb is really the default amount for new computers at the moment. However, memory is very cheap at the moment and is also (potentially) very useful for the kind of work you say you are doing.

x8632bit versions of Windows can 'use' 4Gb, but by the time it has prepared it, in actuallity you really only get just over 3Gb to play with.

If you want to use more than 3Gb then go for a 64 bit versions of windows which should be able to use as much RAM as you can afford

 

[beanzontoast]

If you want to use more than 3Gb then go for a 64 bit versions of windows which should be able to use as much RAM as you can afford

Ah - this is very useful to know, thanks.

 

[twowheelsgood]

Wait a little while until Core technology is a little cheaper and most things will be 4 or more cores anyway. I don't think you can usefully upgrade the main system because I'm assuming you mean by graphics work, photoshop and the likes. Having lots of windows open won't necessarily strain the CPU, unless doing something, so forget browsers and playing mp3s but they will eat memory.

Graphic work is effectively just a series of huge matrix caculations. These usually are often limited by memory bandwidth (i.e. the ram speed), so a faster CPU may not make so much difference, even if your graphic application is multithreaded in a way that can take advantage. If it gets REALLY slow it's usually because the application is paging data to the hard drive. Your dual core should be able handle practically everything that can come out of even a professional camera with relative ease.

Unless the disk light flashes constantly I wouldn't do anything currently, keep your money in your pocket. As always there will always be something cheaper and faster tomorrow, so only buy when you actually really need, don't look too far into the future because an entire next gen system will likely be cheaper than significant upgrade anyway.

It's also not guaranteed that currently available 4 cores will work anyway, even if it does fit in your socket 775. CPUs have power envelopes, voltage requirements (getting lower) and the fabrication technology changes. this has to be accomodated by by BIOS upgrades from your mainboard vendor - this is largely a case of goodwill after a certain period.

 

[marinyork]

That's not what the OP was asking. The preferred nomenclature is also (numerical) linear algebra, if you want to sound smart in the future .

 

[gaz]

Invest some money in some decent memomry as well, no doubt the memory that comes with it is around 800MHz, might as well go to the max your fsb can handle

 

[beanzontoast]

Cheers guys. Think my daughter is looking forward to 'inheriting' my retiring base unit to play Sims on, so I will probably be looking to buy sooner rather than later.

I'm going to keep an eye on Ebuyer etc to see what's about. Any 'good uns' out there that people know about / like the looks of? It's just the base unit I need rather than a full system.

 

[Garz]

You could get a cheap quad based computer built on the socket 775, even though its 'older' tech than the i7 it would still wipe the floor for what you use it for. I have a dual core (c2d) and it flies, however a quad is only about £80 more expensive which I would choose if upgrading at this moment in time.

 

[HJ]

- I'm likely going to be running Xp on one and Windows 7 on the other to start with, becoming Windows 7 on both eventually, so this looks good.

How does memory pan out on a quad core? I see quite a few quad cores being sold with only 2gb memory. Presumably, to get the full benefit of the processor (as compared to my dual core running 3gb memory) I'd need to bump the quad core base's memory up to maybe 4gb?

If you are planning on using more that 3Gb of RAM you will need to use a 64bit OS, as the older 32bit OS's can address more than 3Gb of RAM. Window is available in 64bit versions from XP onwards...

 

[beanzontoast]

If you are planning on using more that 3Gb of RAM you will need to use a 64bit OS, as the older 32bit OS's can address more than 3Gb of RAM. Window is available in 64bit versions from XP onwards...

Yes - I understand Windows 7 comes with both 32 and 64bit versions in the box? Should make things a bit easier.

 

[rh100]

Yes - I understand Windows 7 comes with both 32 and 64bit versions in the box? Should make things a bit easier.

Does the license cover both though?

I know with Vista, my disc has all the 32 bit versions from Home through to Business on the one disc, but the license only covers Home Premium, it fails if you install the wrong one.