Windows 8 AMD CPU Help

[shaneblack]

I have AMD Turion 2 2.50ghz dual-core. I do need some help in picking a better CPU. Will a 3.0ghz Phenom 2 dual-core be an improvement enough or do I need a Triple core or quad, and if so what speed would work. Do triple and quad cores with lower speeds do better then dual cores with faster speeds, like 2.2ghz quad core vs. 3.0ghz dual-core ? Please be specific in explaining this so I can might the right purchase. Will a AMD phenom 2 triple core clocked at 2.2ghz outperform an AMD dual-core at 2.50ghz. Or will a quad core clocked at around 1.8ghz outperform both dual and tripple. i'm still confused to whether a tri or quad core clocked at a lower speed will outperform a dual-core clocked at a higher speed. dual 3.0ghz vs. tri 2.2ghz vs. quad 1.8ghz. Which is the best for performance ?

The price on the Amd Phenom 2 dual-core N660 is double the price of a phenom quad core at 1.8 - 2.2 ghz. Performance benchmarks indicate an increase from turion 2 p560 2.5ghz score of 1,551 to 1,858 or so with the dual-core phenom n660 3ghz. And quad core 1.8ghz was 2,000 something, but the benchmark on that was probably done with a 4 core program.

 

[Expert]

Since the majority of "consumer" applications are single threaded, a dualcore is all you need unless you are running more than one videocard or doing a lot of video editing or 3d modelling & such and have the programs that can handle all those cores

Quadcore cpu's better handle the overhead associated with running multiple videocards but if you only run a single graphics card and only rarely edit/transcode videos & such, a dualcore is really all "I" ever needed

ANY new x86 cpu will work fine with Windows 8

If you MUST buy a new cpu, just get the fastest one you can afford (regardless of number of cores)

Have you tried the cpu you already have with Windows 8?
If so, what is wrong with it?

 

[kemical]

I have AMD Turion 2 2.50ghz dual-core. I do need some help in picking a better CPU. Will a 3.0ghz Phenom 2 dual-core be an improvement enough or do I need a Triple core or quad, and if so what speed would work. Do triple and quad cores with lower speeds do better then dual cores with faster speeds, like 2.2ghz quad core vs. 3.0ghz dual-core ? Please be specific in explaining this so I can might the right purchase. Will a AMD phenom 2 triple core clocked at 2.2ghz outperform an AMD dual-core at 2.50ghz. Or will a quad core clocked at around 1.8ghz outperform both dual and tripple. i'm still confused to whether a tri or quad core clocked at a lower speed will outperform a dual-core clocked at a higher speed. dual 3.0ghz vs. tri 2.2ghz vs. quad 1.8ghz. Which is the best for performance ?

The price on the Amd Phenom 2 dual-core N660 is double the price of a phenom quad core at 1.8 - 2.2 ghz. Performance benchmarks indicate an increase from turion 2 p560 2.5ghz score of 1,551 to 1,858 or so with the dual-core phenom n660 3ghz. And quad core 1.8ghz was 2,000 something, but the benchmark on that was probably done with a 4 core program.

Hi Shane,

I guess it boils down to what do you use your machine for? If it's simply for online, emailing and productivity tasks then that's totally different to say a gaming pc.

If your choosing a cpu with a number of cores then that's fine for software which is multithreaded but for software that isn't you need to make sure that the cpu in question still has plenty of oomph when using either one or two cores.

Personally I always go for the fastest cpu I can afford, usually around 3GHz and upward. That way I know that if only one core is being used it's got the clout I need.

I do prefer a quad over say a dual core (although I'm buying an 8 core in two weeks). The situation isn't like it was a couple of years ago and software is becoming more and more multithreaded especially in games.

Also you might want to consider future proofing, more cores are definitely the way to go due to the thermal limits on cpu's. It won't be too long before 12 or even 16 cores will be available to buy. That's not to say you actually need one but that the industry is moving that way.

A good site to peruse is Toms Hardware as they usually have various articles on this very subject and it's well worth looking through their archives.

Tom's Hardware : Hardware News, Tests and Reviews

Just to add, PC component prices are currently rock bottom and you couldn't have picked a better time to upgrade. A chip like mine an AMD Phenom II BE 965 can be bought for a little under a £100, an absolute steal. I'm sure better deals are to be found out there it's just a case of looking..

 

[Robertwav1]

Since the majority of "consumer" applications are single threaded, a dualcore is all you need unless you are running more than one videocard or doing a lot of video editing or 3d modelling & such and have the programs that can handle all those cores

Quadcore cpu's better handle the overhead associated with running multiple videocards but if you only run a single graphics card and only rarely edit/transcode videos & such, a dualcore is really all "I" ever needed

ANY new x86 cpu will work fine with Windows 8

If you MUST buy a new cpu, just get the fastest one you can afford (regardless of number of cores)

Have you tried the cpu you already have with Windows 8?
If so, what is wrong with it?

I would think, please correct me if I'm wrong. The x64 dual core would be better with windows 8. As with the x64 quad core be faster. A 64 bit operating system outperforms a 32 bit OS in windows 7, I would assume windows 8 would perform even better. I know this because one of my machines was running 7 with a 32 bit processor. A slower speed with a dual core running a 64 bit OS was showing higher benchmarks in just about everything, Games included even though I'm not a gaming freak. I guess what I'm saying is a dual core, x64 proc and a 64 bit OS is what I would look for. ???

 

[Expert]

I would think, please correct me if I'm wrong. The x64 dual core would be better with windows 8. As with the x64 quad core be faster. A 64 bit operating system outperforms a 32 bit OS in windows 7, I would assume windows 8 would perform even better. I know this because one of my machines was running 7 with a 32 bit processor. A slower speed with a dual core running a 64 bit OS was showing higher benchmarks in just about everything, Games included even though I'm not a gaming freak. I guess what I'm saying is a dual core, x64 proc and a 64 bit OS is what I would look for. ???

There is no benefit to a 64 bit O.S. unless you need 64 bit software that requires more than 4GB of memory

"IF" you absolutely need 64 bit software for video production or whatever, then that type of software will run much better with a quadcore cpu as most high end video software is optimized for multicores or threads

If your software was not optimized for multiple threads, then there will be no benefit to using a quadcore cpu and a fast dualcore is all you will need

Does your software require a 64 bit O.S. ?
Do you need more than 4GB of RAM ?
Is your software optimized for multiple cores ?

The question to ask is - Do you NEED a 64 bit O.S. for the software you want to run?

Since Microsoft has free 90 day trials of Windows 8 RTM in both 32 and 64 bit versions...

Try them both out and see what works best with the software you have

 

[Robertwav1]

There is no benefit to a 64 bit O.S. unless you need 64 bit software that requires more than 4GB of memory

"IF" you absolutely need 64 bit software for video production or whatever, then that type of software will run much better with a quadcore cpu as most high end video software is optimized for multicores or threads

If your software was not optimized for multiple threads, then there will be no benefit to using a quadcore cpu and a fast dualcore is all you will need

Does your software require a 64 bit O.S. ?
Do you need more than 4GB of RAM ?
Is your software optimized for multiple cores ?

The question to ask is - Do you NEED a 64 bit O.S. for the software you want to run?

Since Microsoft has free 90 day trials of Windows 8 RTM in both 32 and 64 bit versions...

Try them both out and see what works best with the software you have

Okay, fair enough. I had 32 bit software in three machines and now there all 64 bit and much happier with performance. Okay...photoshop requires a lot of horsepower. I guess I'm not looking at the fact that I use it for a lot of video intense stuff. I would suggest not to skimp on a good video card. The new SSD's are blazing fast! Gee....sorry for getting off the thread a little but we do live in a good time.