Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Der Brewling
I think there is a misconseption about Dual core chips and that "2 is better than 1". These have twin cores yes, but unless the application is programmed to utilize both it will not do any good. And even if, it doenst use both cores like a single processor, it splits up the work load between them. Dual core chips are no differant than SMP configurations with 2 seperate processors.
Therefor, that is why it is not the "ultimate gamer" chip, you would still be better off with a solid single core processor.
|
Yes, yes, I already mentioned that for gaming and other single tasks, the second core wouldn't do a thing. That's pretty obvious. The code just isn't designed to utilize an additional (or multiple) "CPUs". But unless the two issues nikhsub1 presented are fairly significant (which might be the case), a dual core OCed clocked at the same speed of an OCed FX55 would perform basically the same -- in games and other non multi-CPU/core optimized softwares.
Now even if those two issues are only trivial, the OCed dual-core would still, by definition, not be the "ultimate" gaming solution because of those two issues. But it would be awfully close (again, assuming trivial in this case) and would give the user a lot more power for things like video encoding (which I do on a fairly regular basis), rendering, and such, and prove to be a getter choice with the future in mind. More “futureproof”. I guess this last benefit isn't an issue for those who layout 2k+ every 6mths or year for a new rig though.
Remember, were talking about an
OCed dual core. Let's assume it has the same max OC potential as the FX55….
My question is: Just how inferior would the dual core be in this scenario? How significant are those afore mentioned issues? Any additional cons?
Thanks again.