HT or Dual Core?

D

dgessler

New Member
I'm looking at buying a Dell 9100:
http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/dimen_9100?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd

And I'm really not sure if Dual Core is worth it right now or not. I don't play games much, but I often times have many windows programs running at once (FTP programs, html editing, microsoft office products, etc.).

Someone who is familiar with both, please shed some light. I don't know what to do. :( I don't know if dual core will be a big difference over HT or not. I heard somewhere, that we won't be able to take full advantage of dual core if the software wasn't made to work with the dual core technology, making it useless..? Dell offers a P4 3.0 HT technology chip, or one of Intel's 3 dual core ships (2.8, 3.0, 3.2).

Thanks.
Dan
 
both of them utilise hyper threading. the dual core ones have more virtual cores because of the dual core situation.
as far as im aware, the dual core offers no extra benefit over the single core ones going by what ive seen on the net... its a shame they dont offer dual core AMD processors
 
As far as my internet research has taken me, the Pentium D dual-cores don't use Hyper-threading.. Hmm. I guess I'm basically trying to see if a dual core Pentium D series will really benefit me over a P4 Hyper-threading processor, and if so, if the price is worth it.
 
Last edited:
If you wanted an AMD dual core you would either have to build your own system or buy from another manufacturer. I'm not too impressed with Intel's dual core lineup, although out of the four options I reccomend the Pentium D 820 for its performace/price ratio. Although if you have the extra money you can upgrade to the 830 or 840 to increase performance.
 
you should assemble the computer yourself. dell = expensive. amd has X2. but if you insist go with the pentium 6xx. from what i have read the 6xx and the 8xx benchmark about the same.
 
What's the "advantage" to having duel-core anyway? Seems kinda expensive for something that prolly isn't that much better. Or is this sort of going to be a gateway item for the future? :confused:
 
Only the Pentium D Extreme Edition will have hyperthreading.
(FTP programs, html editing, microsoft office products, etc.)
Click to expand...
This isn't a heavy enough load to really need a dual core, even a non-hyperthreaded CPU could make that multitasking work fairly fast.
 
both of them utilise hyper threading.
Click to expand...
One of them is a Pentium 4 630 with HT ... the other is a Pentium D 840. The former has hyperthreading, the latter does not

the dual core ones have more virtual cores because of the dual core situation
Click to expand...
Only true for the Pentium Extreme Edition. Not the Pentium D

as far as im aware, the dual core offers no extra benefit over the single core ones going by what ive seen on the net...
Click to expand...
I dunno where you're looking but Dual Core offers a significant boost over single core .. obviously for multithreaded enviornments

its a shame they dont offer dual core AMD processors
Click to expand...
Good thing they do ... The xx5 Opterons and the Athlon64 X2s

as far as im aware tho, Dell dont put AMD chips in their PC's
Click to expand...
Possibly correct but doesnt mean AMD doesnt make Dual Core processors

What's the "advantage" to having duel-core anyway?
Click to expand...
You can have two threads executing at 100% power rather than at say 50%

Seems kinda expensive for something that prolly isn't that much better.
Click to expand...
Dunno where you're looking but Intel Dual Cores start at ~250USD which isnt that expensive consdering their other prices
 
One of them is a Pentium 4 630 with HT ... the other is a Pentium D 840. The former has hyperthreading, the latter does not
Click to expand...

I stand corrected... I've never been really interested in those furnace like excuses for processors that Intel offer ;)

Good thing they do ... The xx5 Opterons and the Athlon64 X2s
Click to expand...

By "they" i meant Dell... i've never been one of those people that spell things out

Possibly correct but doesnt mean AMD doesnt make Dual Core processors
Click to expand...

I didn't actually say they didn't :)
 
I stand corrected... I've never been really interested in those furnace like excuses for processors that Intel offer
Click to expand...
Actually both of those run very cool. You seem to be confusing the Prescott cored Pentium 4 2.4-3.4Ghz processors with the Prescott cored Pentium 4 5xx (and newer) series. And if you think AMD's all funky about cooling -- remember the AthlonXP
 
i dont think the xp was quite as bad as the TBird... i had one and it always ran toasty :D

as i posted earlier, my knowledge of P4's isn't very extensive and im just picking up on general trends
 
i dont think the xp was quite as bad as the TBird... i had one and it always ran toasty
Click to expand...
Tbirds were 1.75v 95Cmax chips and Palominos were 1.75v and 90C (with the MP variant being 95C) so its close either way.
 
its best not to buy a dual core right now cause not many programs will be able to use its extra power....so buy it later in the future
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top