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

Will you be moving to a dual-core processor soon?

Jan 24, 2006 6:48AM PST

Will you be moving to a dual-core processor soon?

Yes (Why and which one?)
No (What's holding you back?)
Maybe (Why or why not?)
I already have (Which one?)
I don't know what you are talking about

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Me too - people don't know what their missing!
Jan 24, 2006 3:27PM PST

I have an AMD Athlon X2 4800+ and it rocks!! I was a die hard Intel computer user until this purchase. Happy

- Collapse -
Its Time for A New Machine
Jan 24, 2006 2:35PM PST

Definitely will move to dual core (read: FX-60). I've started running multiple aps and its killing my otherwise game worthy box (AMD FX-53). If I can get the same gaming horsepower as an FX-57 and still be able to multi-task then its worth the cost especially considering I've been running AMD chips since the MP came out.

- Collapse -
No, I don't think so.
Jan 24, 2006 3:08PM PST

I have a rule that has served me well lo these many years. "Never buy the first years model of anything." I let others invest their time, and money in the bleeding edge. I can wait until the first years worth of upgrades, and fixes are out, and the press has had it's way with the product before I take the plunge.

- Collapse -
all i gotta say HYPERSONIC AMD DUL CORE
Jan 24, 2006 3:22PM PST

CHECK IT OUT ITS FASTER THAN A PLANE EVEN SUPERMAN CHECKS IN FOR THE RIDE! ITS NASSSSSTY!

- Collapse -
Dual Processors
Jan 24, 2006 3:25PM PST

I have just bought a Dell Dimension 9150 with dual processors, Intel Pentium D Processors 820. It runs sweetly even with ten tabs open in Mozilla Firefox. Although some of the credit should go to Firefox, it outplays Windows Internet Explorer in every department.

- Collapse -
Dual Processor
Jan 24, 2006 3:41PM PST

TO be quite honest with you. I personally will almost always choose Intel over AMD. THe reason why is becuase if you remember when AMD first came out, they had more than they fair share of problems. But recently, they have been giving Intel a run for their money and they have (AMD) proven themselves to be a good product. So, if it got to point where I needed to have a dual processor core, I would find it quite interesting. I would do more reseach on it than I do now with anything. I would probably do it.
thanks

- Collapse -
dual core or not
Jan 24, 2006 4:41PM PST

I have a dual core AMD 4400+
It is the dogs b+++++++ks, my system runs like a dream, how many windows apps can i run, i have had up to 7 different windows programes running and still have enough power to game at a BF2 server not even a slow down, they are great, best thing i have ever bought mind you had to buy a new motherboard,memory, hdd, now have dual alined sata 2 hdd's fast well compared to my old system P4 3300, like a sports car against a reliant 3 wheeler........
Have fun get into the server first pick your transport and start takeing flags almost befor anyone else lol...
Oh system is also alot cooler

- Collapse -
No, my current sigle core CPU is enough for me.
Jan 24, 2006 6:01PM PST

I don't play a game or draw 3D graphics, so my Celeron@1.7GHz is enough for me. If I upgrade my CPU, I'd buy Pen4 Northwood core, because of my mother board's limitation.

- Collapse -
Not Yet
Jan 24, 2006 6:54PM PST

There is not a sufficient amount of software available to take advantage of the extra power of dual core processors at this time

- Collapse -
Dual-Core Mac? No
Jan 24, 2006 9:35PM PST

Here's another reason:

The byte-swapping issue. The new Macs require new software also, which adds thousands of $ to the price. Byte-swappping (via Rosetta or some other program) exacts such a performance hit that the higher speed intel Macs are slower than the current IBM versions. Another reason is that I use real word formatted data. The IBM Macs use IEEE real format, as do most Unix servers. I have seen nothing abou this issue on the Intel Macs, but PC's do not adhere to the IEEE real standard, and these cannot read such data from Unix, and their data cannot be read without considerable low-level byte swapping & re-formatting.

- Collapse -
The new Apple Notebook Duo is the one
Jan 24, 2006 9:50PM PST

If that baby boots XP, watch out! Can't wait to hook that machine up to the 30" 2nd monitor. Go Jobs Go!

- Collapse -
why bother?
Jan 24, 2006 9:51PM PST

Yeah I suppose I'll upgrade eventually. But I'm running a 2800+ chip and with small exceptions that handles everything I need to run quite handily. Maybe when software I want to run actually requires the dual-core or 64-bit processors I will upgrade but as long as all I really need is my 32 bit processor, the only things that I'll be upgrading is ram (I only have a pitiful 512 Mb) and a video card (from my Nvidia Geforce 440MX)

- Collapse -
Not till 2 things happen!
Jan 24, 2006 10:10PM PST

I won't go with another dual core or 64-bit until 2 things happen. 1) The price drops to a level I can afford. 2) Not until the vendors ACTUALLY start to support the product they sell. I've had an HP 64-bit machine for almost a year now and they still haven't released the 64-bit drivers for the audio, video, etc. All I get from them is that it's coming! The machine will probably go obsolete before that happens.

- Collapse -
AMD OR INTEL
Jan 24, 2006 10:12PM PST

I do not have a need to upgrade at the present time.However if and when I do upgrade I'll build my own computer and will use only an AMD cpu.

- Collapse -
roll tide
Jan 25, 2006 12:07AM PST

this is unrelated to your post, i just wanted to chime in and say.


ROLL TIDE

- Collapse -
Because they now power a computer with a decen OS!
Jan 24, 2006 10:17PM PST

Why will I be moving? Because the new Apple Macs use them.

And to which one? Clearly the Intel version.

Chers

- Collapse -
you are using the intel dual core because you have no choice
Jan 25, 2006 12:06AM PST

sadly, you will never see the awesomeness that would be AMD X2 with OS10

the amd x2 is an obviously superior chip, OS10 is an obviously superior OS. Its a shame we wont ever get to see them paired.

- Collapse -
Yep, iMac G5
Jan 24, 2006 10:31PM PST

Amazon.com is offering a $150 rebate on the Intel machine!

- Collapse -
AMD M2 Socket, I'm waiting for you.....
Jan 24, 2006 10:34PM PST

Yes I will definitely be moving most my office over to dual core in the next 6-8 months. You ask why the wait,
1) MS has not announced the hardware required to run the next version of their desktop OS, or their next version of MS Office.
2) unless Intel surprises us and thinks outside the box, I plan to use the new AMD M2 socket. The prospects of a dual core, 64bit, M2 CPU sound promising.
3) Video cards should also metamophisize over the next year to support the new OS and Office requirements. That is not even mentioning the new "PhysX" video accelerator by Ageia or the dual core processors made just for video cards!
4) Will we see (by mid-fall 2006) the new IDE hard drives (SATA or PATA) that support the onboard non-volatile memory to cache part of your OS for almost instantaneous reads? Oh yeah, and the special mobo's and chipsets to support them?

I believe the changes in the hardware environment are going to be coming faster than usual this year, buying equipment now (unless you have no other choice) would not be a sound expenditure (and hardware very rarely is a sound investment as it is usually replaced in a year or less with superior technoogy)

Buying hardware right now with all the upcoming changes wouldn't be too prudent. Better to wait until the new specs come out for the new MS OS\Office.

I am a devote AMD Even though I know "anything is possible" Who knows, maybe Intel will turn their "core duo" aka Yonah into a desktop version, then put it on sterioids? Nah, I think for now I'm stuck on AMD.

- Collapse -
Time fro a new machine
Jan 24, 2006 11:07PM PST

And it will be hand built and have the Intel Duel Core.
I have never used an AMD chip, know people from the past that have had over heating issues.
Beside their(AMD)commercials suck.

- Collapse -
Not moving....
Jan 24, 2006 11:45PM PST

Price is the biggest reason. These dual cores are the way to much money for me.

Also, just how much 64-bit software is out there? I mean besides operating systems like Linux and Windows people. I haven't seen enough of reason for to upgrade yet.

I don't fall into AMD's, Intel's, or any computer parts faster speed trap. I can't keep up with my current computer computing speed. I played that game before; it's an expensive game.

- Collapse -
The only reason I'm not upgrading is cost! n/t
Jan 25, 2006 12:21AM PST

n/t = no text

- Collapse -
Most Likely
Jan 25, 2006 12:32AM PST

Because it is time to upgrade my pc and I figure I might has well have all the bells whether I use them or not. And simply because I am a techno-*****.

- Collapse -
OK Mark..
Jan 25, 2006 1:23AM PST

Dual-core AMD X2 4600. Already have it and is being built now. ALL the benchmarks say the X2 beats Intel hands down. And I mean ALL. Connected with the right motherboard (ASUS) and video (ATI-PCIe) and memory (OCX platinum) and SATA (Raptor 74gb 10K rpm) this baby is going to sing, sing, sing. Enough said! Happy

and life goes on...

Jack

- Collapse -
I have...
Jan 25, 2006 2:13AM PST

I have the AMD 64 X2 4600+. I wanted the best but still had to consider price, basically I weighed out the differences and found a middle ground. Quite frankly I am appauled at Intel, I can not understand where they get the nerve producing an inferior product and charging so much more for it. I can understand some people want to stick with Intel, it's a big, conforming name. They advertise heavily and some people are so suseptable to such advertising ploys. I always like to use this example as a reference; look at diet pepsi, pepsi free, and pepsi one, they are all diet pepsi, the same exact recepie, same exact ingredients ( with the new exception of adding splenda to one of their products ) and yet they are able to capitalize on it due to different adds. I can not believe that there are people out there who believe they are drinking a different product. But any way back to the topic at hand, it is kind of scarey to me that no matter how much research is offered and how much test data is available, there are still people who believe that Intel is the better product. Go ahead and spend $1100 on a chip that is inferior to a $600 chip, it's your perogative and your money. At least you have the Intel name on your product. Performance, price, servcice, AMD all the way.

- Collapse -
Will you be moving to a dual-core processor soon?
Jan 25, 2006 2:42AM PST

I have an Intel 4 dual core 3.2GHZ. I have had no trouble and it runs superbly.

- Collapse -
dual core processor
Jan 25, 2006 2:54AM PST

Will be buying new Apple

- Collapse -
yes switch to dual core, with mac book pro
Jan 25, 2006 3:29AM PST

The Macbook pro is sick and that is dual core and I am going to get one hopefully so I wil be siwtching to dual core. MACS RULE

- Collapse -
gots no money
Jan 25, 2006 3:41AM PST

got no money and don't see the point in spending huge amounts of money of brand new technologies. let all the geeks that have nothin better to do but buy the new computer parts buy them, then in 6 months when the price has dropped seven-fold, i might consider buying a processor that could only double my performance anyway.

- Collapse -
pentium works for me
Jan 25, 2006 6:52AM PST

It still seems like every sytem upgrade gets eaten up by windows os.