Battlefield Community Forums • View topic

jtingle423 · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 2:35 pm

http://www.techradar.com/news/computing ... sor-147906

screw i quad core i want one of these
this is why i never buy the newest and the fastest just to have the newest and the fastest.. it never last long before they come out with something better.

Tilaron · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:20 pm

Uhhh, quad cores should handle any game that comes out in at least the next 5 years, and dual cores are still just as good. This is just redonkulous.

CodJohn · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:29 pm

The awesomness in "eight-core" is rather great though

But I doubt I'll need one for the next 5 years, as Tilaron said. Just spent almost an entire summer working to get the comp I've got now...

RaRaAvIs · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 6:01 pm

Exactly it's impressive but far beyond the needs of 95% of people who have a PC for at least the next 3 years.

jtingle423 · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 6:21 pm

but imagine the games you could run with that kind of processing power

CodJohn · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 6:41 pm

jtingle423 wrote:

but imagine the games you could run with that kind of processing power

That's perhaps the biggest problem. They aren't making games so complex that you really get any benefit over a good dual core/quad core. Yet

NitroTab · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 6:49 pm

All sounds very good but what you got to remember is that they are hardly utilizing Dual-core for games these days let alone Quad and 8-core CPU's, only a handfull of games actually use Dual-core.

All sounds like a marketing gimick to get us to hand over yet more of our hard earned cash (not likely with me though, what with all this credit crises going on and all).

RaRaAvIs · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:39 pm

I've got a Quad core, which is going to keep me going for a good few years. And the only game that'll actually push it, is Crysis.

Tilaron · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:44 pm

My dual core does everything I need it to. The only people that could possibly need an 8 core at the moment are whoever runs the servers/computers that'll be going through all the data the LHC pumps out. But even they probably don't use programs that can utilise 2 cores, let alone 8.

NitroTab · **Posted:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:27 pm

Tilaron wrote:

My dual core does everything I need it to. The only people that could possibly need an 8 core at the moment are whoever runs the servers/computers that'll be going through all the data the LHC pumps out. But even they probably don't use programs that can utilise 2 cores, let alone 8.

CGI fx companies would probably have a use for them as well probably.

AngryAngelSniper · **Joined:** Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:37 pm **Posts:** 65

Have Dual core for 2 yrs now n barely scratching surface of it's abilitys now..Screw quad core for now anyway-saving my money...More Memory might be only thing I'll put money into soon..Seeing how others have said it makes a difference in bf2

Daddy Cool · **Posted:** Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:18 pm

I just upgraded...had a AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ and fixed me up with a 6000+ instead...still dualcore. 3.0GHz is enough for now...I put my money on the GPU, PSU and RAM instead.

SepalusAuki · **Posted:** Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:33 pm

Yeah, GPU is the one making the difference. Modern games just can't take advantage of multiprocessors yet. Clock speed is more important these days, I'd rather take 3GHz dual-core than 2GHz quad-core.

BaTeSy · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:27 am

how about those GFX cards, that Nvidia are developing, which have an actual CPU instead of a GPU.

imagine, a Nvidia **** GTX with a Dual-core processor running it :P

jtingle423 · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:49 am

BaTeSy wrote:

how about those GFX cards, that Nvidia are developing, which have an actual CPU instead of a GPU.

imagine, a Nvidia **** GTX with a Dual-core processor running it

screw a 8 core cpu the games that could run would look real