Personal spec questions?
Posted in Desktops on July 14th, 2008
Which would be superior to play a game that states on the box (No specific game, just a hypothetical question) “Pentium 4 3.0 gHz or equivalent required”?
A 3.0 gHz AMD Athlon X2 6000 Dual Core
or,
a 2.2 gHz AMD Phenom X4 9550 Quad-Core?
I know that
1.) a faster processor is good, hence 3 gHz is superior than 2.2 gHz, and
2.) a quad core is superior than a dual core,
but, to what extent does a quad-core with a lower frequency (lower gHz) outweigh and outperform a dual-core with a higher frequency (higher gHz), if it does? Please help me, I know a lot about computers, but I don't know this. Also, which is superior, AMD, or Intel (yes, let the arguments start) (I actually prefer AMD, but I want to see what others think), and please provide evidence to support your statement. Thank you for the help!
Answer:
thats really confusing but the phenom x4 despite slower frequency wins. the p4 is 3 GHz, the dual core would be just under 6 GHz, and the Phenom would be just over 8 GHz.
processors with multiple cores you times it purchase the number of cores and subtract a little to make up for lag. the phenom wins. dual core 6 GHz, quad core 8 GHz. thats how it is.
processors with multiple cores can never really lose in performance to a processor with one core even if it was faster than the multi core one. for example and just example: if there was a freakish p4 like 10 GHz a 8 GHz quadcore would still win. they spread there work load over there different cores where if it only has one core, that one core has to do all the work.
Answer this Question