Dual-Core VS Single-Core

Like I, and two dozen others, have already said a couple of times, your current CPU is good enough to run current games. It's not optimal (and may not run at max settings), but can run the games.
When a game says it needs a 2.6GHz CPU, that's just an estimate. If you're lucky, they'll say what kind of CPU this refers to (Your CPU is easily faster than a Pentium 4 at 2.6GHz, but nowhere near as fast as a Core 2 at 2.6GHz)
But again, it's just an estimate, and there is no real "minimum req". You'll still be able to run the game with a slower CPU, it just may not run as well.
If you want to know *exactly* how well a given game will run on your system, you have two options. Email the publisher and ask them, or buy the game/try the demo.
Games performance is mostly determined by the GPU, not the CPU, so even with a slow CPU you may be able to run games ok, if you have a good GPU.

We're not psychics, though. When all we know is your CPU, it's impossible for us to tell you what it can and cannot do We also have no way of testing whether game X will run on your system, because we don't *have* your system.

Now could you please stop repeating yourself?
If you need a more specific answer, you'll need to ask more specific questions.
If our answers aren't good enough, you'll need to tell us what it is you want to hear.
If you just repeat the same question, you're going to get the same answer, and that's just a waste of everyone's time.

 

I did'nt know i asked the same question that any times...

 

Alright, I read this thread, and think i understood most of it... however... when you actually get outof the theory of these designs and all... how does it play out in the real world?

For oblivion for example, the requirements are: 3 Ghz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent processor.... well I am looking at getting a laptop, with a dual core... How in the world do I know if the system that I am looking at will play that?

I guess it is based on how well the game will be able to use the dual door (if it uses it). But how do you know. Games only seem to list single core requirements.

I am interested planning for fallout 3, but requrements havent been released yet. So I am just trying to figure out this whole requiremts thing...

So if oblivion wants 3GHz, does that mean that if it was able to perfectly use dual cores, you would be able to meet that with dual 1.6ghz, and any inefficiencies require a bigger chip... so assuming that it can only use the second at 30%, you would need... ummm... 3/1.3= dual 2.3 ghz??

sorry for the basic question. It used to be easy back in the day of 286, 386, 486... now things are a lot less clear.

Thanks
Rick

 

I have a Core2Duo 1.5GHz processor, I am yet to find a game that struggles with my PC due to the processor (my GPU is a 8600mGT though ). According to nVidia's games advisor my processor is equivalent to a 3.0GHz Pentium 4. If you go to nZone ( http://www.nzone.com) you can test if most games will run on your PC, I use when I can't find a demo, otherwise I stick to downloading the demo and trying it before I buy any games as some stores are very reluctant to give money back if a game doesn't run on your hardware.

 

Wow!

Nonya24

You have a 2.0 Pentium M, with Geforce Go 7800GTX. To get the same or better performance, you will need at least a 1.8 dual core CPU with 8600GT. Even then, you want see much performance gain unless you run applications to take advantage of multiple processors. I don’t know why people are comparing Pentium 4’s, when you have a Pentium Dothan. I use both variants of dual cores (AMD/Intel), and see no difference in what I do using them compared to the 2.13 or 1.7 running at 2.26 I have. My computer with the 2.13 is no gaming laptop, but the 2.26 with 6800go runs older games faster than the dual core with 8600GS. COD4 only runs a few FPS more with the dual core unit, but that’s because the video card is optimized for newer games and the 6800 isn’t. But taking you have a 7800GTX, I’m sure you would have much better performance than I do with the 6800go.

Doodles pretty much summed it up. Just remember. Everything from this point on is optimized for newer CPU’s and GPU’s, so the performance gain of dual core vs. single core will widen its gap.

 

That's what I said. For real world answers, you have to test it out in the real world. None of us have your computer. None of us can tell you what your real world results are going to be.

Well, we *can* compare a P4 to a modern CPU.
A P4 running at 3.0GHz is more or less equal to a modern single core running at half that.
If you have a CPU in which each core runs at least 1.5GHz, then each core will be about as fast as a P4 3.0GHz. Which means that it will work out well *enough*.

Will Oblivion further gain anything from you having two cores? Maybe. That depends 100% on the game. I seem to recall that Oblivion was patched to take advantage of multicore CPU's in some cases ,so perhaps you'll see a 10-30% performance improvement from having two cores.
But again, I don't have your computer. All I can say is the "theory" as you call it.

Yep. Often you don't know. Sometimes you can find the information on the internet if you search a bit. But usually, you don't really know. On the other hand, usually, your CPU speed is the least of your worries too. Usually, the best rule of thumb is "your CPU is fast enough". Because unless it's *really* ancient, that will be the case.

Nope, when they say 3.0GHz, they are talking as if you had a Pentium 4. Which ran at high clock speeds, but had lousy performance despite it.
*One* P4 core at 3.0GHz is about as fast as *one* Core 2 core running at 1.5GHz. That's nothing to do with dual-core, just that each individual core is a lot more powerful than they were in the past.

But unfortunately, there is typically no information in games' requirements about how they behave with multiple cores. They may gain some performance, or they may not.

As I said, rule of thumb: Your CPU is fast enough. Worry about all the other factors. GPU speed is usually the big killer, and sometimes amount of RAM.

 

More memory is always good. I went from 1GB to 2GB on my inspiron 9400 and that made a hell of a lot of difference to the performance in everything, especially games.

 

if a game requires ANY kind of Pentium 4 as the lowest spec, then ANY dual-core processor will be more the enough....speed means nothing anymore, the Core 2 architecture completely disregards speed and they are the fastest we have ever seen and will be more than fast for a while.

My 1.6ghz Core 2 will easily last me another two years, even in gaming. If you have any kind of dual core you will be fine.

And actually read the thread, poor Jalf keeps having to answer the same question 3000 times.

 

While Nars' previous post is correct in concept, one thing should be clarified.

Hz rating is NOT speed.
1Hz = 1 cycle per second
MHz = millions of cycles per second
GHz = billions of cycles per second

While using higher Ghz comparisons in one generation generallly does give you the faster processor, it does NOT apply to two different processors or different generations.
Comparing the GHz of two different generations of processors is completely rediculous as you are forgetting the most important point...
How much does the processor DO in one cycle?
Sure, if they do the same in one cycle, then more cycles = faster, but without knowing what they do in a cycle you cannot use the timing as an indication of speed.

This is why ONE core of today's dual core processors at a lower Hz rating completely destroy previous generations at higher ratings. Add the second core in programs designed for it and you have an absolute slaughter.

Again, most of this is semantics, but the whole "timing = speed" thing needs to die as it is misleading.

 

A 2.0 Ghz Core 2 duo is sufficient and efficient for any game today.
Unless you play hardcore RTS, like WiC , then a 2.4 or 2.6 CPU would do you justice.

 

Exactly. This whole thread is people asking the same question. C2D is faster than a P4. Okay? It's pretty simple.

C2D >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P4

And my processor for gaming will last me a while for gaming, but for normal apps it'll last me MUCH longer.

 

don't understand this cpu mania. Most ppl don't even utilize 50% of their cpu power and yet they want it faster and faster.

 

this is getting out of hand, let me put it in tech idiot wordings
if there is exactly one thing to process a 2ghz core 2 duo is as fast as a 2ghz core 2 solo. a duo core processor is simply 2 CPUs in the same die. due to advancements in technology, a single core of the current gen duo core processor is about 1.5-2 times faster than a P4 at the same clock. so if there is now two things to process, a core to duo can do both tasks at the same time, which means 1.5x2 times faster than a P4 at the same clock

to put simply
one task: core 2 duo is about 1.5-2 times faster that a P4 same clock
multitask: core 2 duo is about 3-4 times faster that a P4 same clock

 

I mean just look at the 32M wPrime scores....

A P4 3.4 GHz processor scored 83 seconds.

A 2.2 GHz T7500 scored 36 seconds.

For what it's worth.

 

There's an explanation - Windows Vista.

Quad cores are already here, and next up are 12 cores, 18 cores and so on.. Sometimes the fast factor do sound cooler then saving some bucks for other stuffs.

 

Alright, that broke it down great! My apologies if you felt like it was repetitive, I didnt get it the first 1000 times I guess haha. I was definitely stuck in the old mentalitiy of how system requirements were listed for games (and how they are still listed). I guess you are right in that the way system specs are called out has to be revamped. It would be nice to have RAM and GPU called out better for requirements. I guess its back to the mentalitiy of "get the biggest GPU you can afford".

Thanks a lot for all the help! It definitely assisted a guy stuck in gaming in the 90's! (half life 1, quake 2, doom, shaddow warrior, duke nukem, wolf 3d, soldier of fortune 2).

Thanks, Rick

 

Hopefully the new PC Gaming Alliance will help fix all the system requirements confusion:

http://www.pcgamingalliance.org/

I think using a Pentium 4 as a minimum requirement is confusing as that is antiquated technology, and few gamers have PC's with a P4 any more.

 

My AMD 1.8GHz (equivilant to a 3.0GHz P4) runs slightly faster than my Core 2 Duo clocked at 1.2GHz.