CPU for around £100

  VNAM75 15:28 28 Aug 2008
Locked

I want to get a cpu but not sure whether to go for amd or intel, 2 cores or 4. Last time I checked a while ago intel had the upper hand in performance.

This one is quad core £116

click here

But this 2 core is a lot more expensive at £169

click here

and is outperformed by the quad core which is a much lower price

click here

I'm looking for a general upgrade/future proofing and my pc will primarily be used for running databases, spreadsheets, music and internet, video encoding, website design software (net objects) - all together. So would the quad core be better? Games performance is not a priority but I expect it to be able to run high end games with a decent gpu (currently have a x1950pro)

  GaT7 16:08 28 Aug 2008

I'd say Intel still have the upper hand. Overall the quad-core will be better for your needs. The E8500 will be better for gaming though.

If you get a good cooler (e.g. click here), the Q6600 can be easily overclocked to 3Ghz (or more depending on your motherboard, RAM, PSU) for an added boost, which should help in gaming too.

Btw, the Q6600 is a bit cheaper (~£113 incl del) at Aria click here. G

  Joe R 18:02 28 Aug 2008

VNAM75,

the 6600, unless overclocked, would show no discernible difference, even in video rendering, encoding/decoding etc, and in all other aspects, the E8500 would be a lot quicker.

If you are going for a cooler to overclock the quad core chip, a cheap, but very good cooler is the Arctic Cooling freezer pro. click here

  Joe R 18:07 28 Aug 2008

E8500 @ £122 click here

  Joe R 18:08 28 Aug 2008

Crossbow7, :-! sorry never noticed your link.

  I am Spartacus 18:50 28 Aug 2008

Or get the E8400, save £60, increase the FSB by 17 (around 5%) and have the same performance as a E8500 click here

The Q6000 even at stock settings is significantly faster than an E8500 or E8400 in video rendering if the software is multiprocessor aware. I have both, I know.

The Q6600 should overclock to 3GHz with little or no increase in voltage.

The E8400 will go to 3.6GHz, again with little or no increase in voltage and the E8500 should go to 4GHz with no voltage increase.

However a Q6600 at around 3.3GHz will still outperform both in video rendering but see the software caveat above.

  Stuartli 18:53 28 Aug 2008

Some info that might be of interest:

click here

  VNAM75 19:07 28 Aug 2008

Thanks everyone, interesting comments and good to know theres cheaper prices than ebuyer. I'm not really into overclocking until later on in the cpu's life, may be towards the last year before I decide to upgrade.

On the link I posted (Toms hardware) the 2 core actually outperforms the quad in some benchmarks, including encoding and gaming, but only marginally. My current amd3800 still runs very smoothly, cant believe its £20 now, paid £270 about 3.5 years ago. Looking at the amd cpu section in ebuyer, the specs seem inferior to the intel cpu's.

"The Q6000 even at stock settings is significantly faster than an E8500 or E8400 in video rendering if the software is multiprocessor aware. I have both, I know.

The Q6600 should overclock to 3GHz with little or no increase in voltage"

Spartacus, thats very useful to know. I'm siding more towards the quad as my choice, 4 cores are better than 2 in most situations surely.

  VNAM75 19:10 28 Aug 2008

If theres 4 cores, the load (multitasking) is spread more evenly compared to 2 so there's less stress on the cpu. Is that correct?

  I am Spartacus 19:19 28 Aug 2008

I have real rather than synthetic timings for video rendering which is why I posted the above. Admittedly it's using the same 6.9GB video file I've used for testing rendering for the last 3 years.

I now have a QX9650 on the way so am expecting significant performance increases in rendering.

Stuartli's link does sort of confirm temperature variances I've noticed especially in E8400 and Q9450.

My Q9600 and Q9450 use around 65% CPU compared to around 85% when rendering. Approximate averages only though. In simple tasks there won't be much difference. In gaming, pariculalry those games that don't make use of quad cores then a faster dual core would be better. In my own personal experience only Video rendering benefits. I haven't noticed any great differences in Crysis for example.

  I am Spartacus 19:26 28 Aug 2008

Correction

'My Q9600 and Q9450 use around 65% CPU compared to around 85% when rendering'... with an E8400

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Acer Predator 21X review

14 best picture books for children

Best podcast apps for iPhone & iPad

Les meilleurs ordinateurs portables 2017