If you’ve been meaning to upgrade, you’d soon be confronted with the dilemma on whether to choose dual core or quad core. Is there a significant difference? Is it worth the price? Do you need it?
You can ask your resident techie who would only dazzle you with terms like cache coherency circuitry or simultaneous multithreading. Or you could ask your dad. He bought it, he thinks it’s better though he can’t give pinpoint why, and he recommends you buy one for yourself.
Let me first point out the obvious. Both are processors: a dual-core has two cores and a quad-core has four. A core is synonymous to a CPU or control-processing unit. And there are benefits and drawbacks to choosing one over the other.
Having a multi-core processor boosts multitasking. It isn’t a new concept. Several tasks — if run on the server — can be worked on by several processors enabling the system to function faster. Each processor handles a separate stream of data and as most users work on several applications at the same time, it makes sense to have more than one processor for enhanced performance. What Intel and AMD did was integrate multiple physical processors in one chip.
That’s the theory. For it to actually work, the software must be prepared to function that way. Compatibility is an issue. Software companies have to keep up with the processor industry. It takes some time for it to catch up. And that is why dual-cores outperform the quad-cores. I’m certain that a year or two from now, the quad-cores will receive all the accolades.
If you’re the type who constantly upgrades, most of your applications would probably function better with a dual-core processor. If the software that you’re using is already compatible with the quad-cores then by all means, go for it. Also take a look the more notable quad core laptops on the market at the moment.
Read about: Core i7 laptops.
Related posts:
Tags: quad core
For stability and multi-tasking speed, I’ve found it’s better to have two dual core CPUs on a machine instead of one quad core (assuming CPU speed is the same). This leads to fewer crashes and stalls when anti-virus, anti-spyware, windows update, etc. run in the background under Windows XP.
I’ve been using a 4 core computer since 2005. That system had two dual core Xenon CPUs. I’ve also used a quad core Xenon later. In 208, I used a dual quad core Xenon with 8 cores and it ran faster than dual core cpu’s with slightly higher ghz.
You make some great points, but I think that it’s all determinant on what you personally need and can afford. If a dual core fits your needs, then you might as well save the money.
Interesting points above. I’m trying to decide between a dual and quad core myself for the latest 27″ iMac. I do alot of 3D and 2D graphic work, video and renderings. Would anybody have any suggestions?
To Paddy:
For iMac 27″ it is better to go for quad-core. Since its Apple so I would think that all softwares installed in iMac are already optimized to work in quad-core environment.
But for PC world the case is different, since softwares are from different vendors.
[...] year ago people where asking, quad core laptop or duo core laptop. Thing have moved on and the current latest and greatest is Core i7 laptops. The Intel Core i7 is [...]
[...] first multi-core to arrive was the Dual Core technology, spearheaded by the Pentium Dual Core by Intel and the subsequent ones by AMD. Through [...]
[...] Core 2 Merom: Intel’s 2nd Mobile Dual-Core CPU [...]