Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

comparing speed with quad and dual core

Nov 27, 2009 3:36PM PST

I'm looking for a new laptop to use mostly for photo editing. I'm finding several machines with quad core processors for a few hundred bucks more than the dual core. However, the quad cores processor speed is slower. So how do I compare these? Is it better to get a quad core even if the processor speed is listed as slower than the same model with a dual core? Any help is appreciated.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
That's a benchmark.
Nov 27, 2009 11:59PM PST

Until you reveal what you use the PC for, I have to give the nod to dual core machines. Quad core should fare well on tasks like VIDEO ENCODING as we can see each core get use (one video decode, another for video encode, another for audio streams and another for the OS, etc.)

Since all this was discussed for the desktops you can research prior discussions and benchmarks for the quad cores versus dual cores.

But on average the dual core is the sweet spot.
Bob

- Collapse -
The Quad core processors are new to laptops.
Nov 28, 2009 11:24PM PST

Intel had the Core 2 Quad and the new I6 and I7. Anytime Intel introduces a new processor its going to be potentially faster. The raodblock is the software is slower to catch up. Clock speed of the processor is how fast the processor calculates only. When Intel introduces a new technology the Cache is larger and the bus is faster between the processor and the memory. In the long run the Core 2 Duo is faster with todays software but the nextr generation of software will be written to take advantage of the 4 cores. But depending on what a person doing they might not be able to tell the difference.