PCA Forums

anyone running a dual or quad socket motherboard? for home use, since the dual/quad core cpus came out, i haven't heard much about it. i'm starting to vaguely consider building a higher end rig to get back into some gaming. i'm sure a newer dual/quad-core is enough...but just curious what you guys are running.

I game on a commodore 64..... (shortb) mile


core 2 duo 2.4ghz is plenty for gaming IMO. Seems to me that the vid card is the real piece of hardware to worry about for this...and mem of course.

I've got a Dell Optiplex Core2du0 2400 + 8800gt 512 + 2GB ram

handles anything I throw at it fine

Dell Dimension 9200 Core 2 Duo Quad Core 2.4GHz.

Honestly though in most apps (except VMWare) I can't tell the difference in performance from my work bench Core 2 Duo Dual Core 2.4GHz.

i got the amd dual core 3.0 ghz and the 8800 gt oc edition 2 gb ram. takes everything i throw at it. i play crysis alot

E4300 (dual core) OCed to 3ghz with 4gb ram & an 8800gs & it plays everything (though Crysis requires medium on some settings & Far Cry 2 can't be maxed out). Otherwise, my other games are all played at max settings. Currently though, it's hard to ignore the AMD/ATI 4850 for a video card.

I do have an MSI dual processor board running dual Athlon XP 2400+ processors & I must say that even against my newer system, it still feels snappy. Of course, it's held back by the AGP slot & DDR ram, but I still like it.

I also have a 2.4GHz quad cpu, with a 8800GT. Never had a single issue running any game, including Crysis.

Core 2 Duo @ 3Ghz with 4GB of Ram and the old 8800GTS. Smooth gaming still, system over a year old now.

I recently got a Q6600, 3GB of Ram and an 8800GT and it's plenty of power. We built a Dual CPU Quadcore rig not too long ago... 8 Cores... It's insane, but you can't tell the difference I dare say beyond Dual core unless the app you're using is coded for it..

eGo

cool...thanks for all the replies. if i pull the trigger on a home built system, i will probably go with a higher model C2D. i will be running 64bit if i do, so then i'll cram in as much RAM as the budget allows. i like to use vmware, so it would benefit from the additional memory.

as for the video card, a few of the ATI options are pretty tempting too. it's nice to read reviews of $100-$150 cards that can handle nearly everything these days...unlike the last time i was buying and they were all $300+.

If you use VMWare a lot, consider a quad core. I really notice the difference between dual and quad when using VMWare.

I run 4Gb on my quad core (WinXP x64). I generally only run one VM at a time and that's plenty of RAM.

I wonder how many vm you could toy with at once with this


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813151089

it comes down to how much RAM you have...most hypervisors require a minimum for whatever OS the vm is running and won't let you start the vm if resources cannot be allocated. some will let you over-allocate though.

an example is at work our vmware hosts all have dual quad-core cpus and 20-32GB of RAM each. we can usually have 20-30 vm's running on a host with absolutely no issues...it just comes down to what the vm's are actually doing, how much bandwidth they need, etc before anything is noticed. of course, if one vm starts to require more, it can dynamically be moved to another host before anyone even notices the performance hit. pretty cool stuff.

Yeah, but can you play Crysis on max with it?

normalicy wrote:Yeah, but can you play Crysis on max with it?

lol :lol