Is a core 2 duo processor too slow for gaming (ME2, SC2) and video playback (compared to an i5)?

e8400 is still a beast that will beat i7s in games overclocked fyi. Probably runs cooler to boot. Hell watercool it and take it to 4.5ghz. Plus cheap ddr2 800 ram, cheap lga775 mobo...it's probably the best bang for the buck imo if were just talking gaming.

 

Thanks for your help everyone.

I decided to purchase the Intel t9400 (or t9600 if it's cheap) cpu and upgrade my Sony Vaio FW laptop to that.

Does anyone know where I can get one for cheap (used or new, I don't care as long as it works and cost around $60-70). Ebay prices seem inflated?

 

ROFL 5000001 to 9 voters?

 

Yes, because NBR simply has lots of imaginary users

 

Oh -- I voted.

 

Left4Dead2 is massivly CPU limited in my notebook.

I notice a difference in FPS between 2.8ghz and 3.066ghz.

 

Dual-cores are no good any more for gaming. If you have any interest in playing newer games like SC2, a quad is the minimum.

 

Was about to post the same. ...I call shenanigans!

 

lmao charles is right.

if your reading this.

cpus are so advanced these days, gpu is all that matters..

eidt. upgrade gpu not cpu


i have tested 1.5ghz vs 3.2 ghz..

what game needs cpu more than gpu...name one

if gtaIV is your answer..my answer is this..I GAINED LESS THAN 1 FPS WITH 500 mhz more cpu power.. SO GET BENt WITH YOUR OPINION

 

Valve games and WoW are both heavily CPU dependant. Not to say they wont run fast on the weaker CPU, but there ARE games out there that thrive only if a stronger CPU is applied.

 

I ran fine games like WOW and SC2 on a T9600, but checking on my G13 most of the time they were above 80% with a lot of time close to 100%, so i think its fine with C2D as long as they are high clocked, i upgraded more because i wanted a true 16:9 res cause of how SC2 scales res favoring it, and most of the cheap laptops come with 1366x768 which isnt supported by sc2 sadly, 1360x768 is their supported res, which makes the game look grany as its not its native res.

 

A dual-core is no long enough for modern games. Whoever tells you that is telling you outdated and irrelevant information.

A quad-core is the minimum now if you want to play modern games on your PC. I don't know who screwed with the poll, but it's biased and I don't like it.

 

Actually, a very fast dual-core is still enough for modern games. Quad-Core just finally made it into the recommended specs ._.

 

I want you try and play Bad Company 2 maxed out using a Dual-Core and a Quad-Core and then come back and tell me if your opinion has changed.

Jesus Christ. I've had firsthand experience with this. A Dual-Core is not enough anymore.

 

My opinion is on running the game smoothly not on maxed out settings. If you're aiming for maxed out settings, sure go ahead and use a quad core ._.

 

Exactly. If you are buying a new gaming PC your goal is to run current games maxed out, as such, a Quad-Core is the minimum.

 

I don't really see this on a laptop though... most quad cores for laptops have really low clocks, so f.x. i5-540 and i7-640 can compete quite competently with the i7-720 and i7-740, at least until games utilise multiple cores more

 

Dual cores are still very competent for general gaming purposes, especially a high clocked one, sure there will be more and more games that utilize multiple cores, but as for now high end dual cores like x9100/t9900/i7-640 could still beat the quad i7s in many games. The current quad i7s are just too slowly clocked, the next generation i7s with sandy bridge will be much better, starts with 2.2Ghz i7-2720m!!

 

too all the comments!

BFBC2 runs maxed out 30-50fps with a c2d, you do NOT need a quad core. what you need to do is put down the pipe for a second.

0 games truely need a Quad core as of October 07/2010.

recommended specs mean nothing.

for example my laptop meets the recommended spec for crysis, but I cannot run it at enthusiast.

minimum specs mean nothing as with my old laptop I exceeded min specs with NFS undercover, but could not get the game on all low 640x480 to run faster than 20fps.


It's just a recommendation, it either recommends you have a great gpu, or a mediocre gpu..but is not a accurate way of measuring if the game will play well or not.

So whos up for the challenge, recommend me 1 game that my C2D will not play because the game is cpu limited.

I have over 60 newer games. 57 games play maxed

GTA IV
CRYSIS
Gothic 4

those are the only games I cannot max out, but run fine on high.

 

I have played BC2 on my desktop (specs in sig) at max settings and it ran fine. A quad-core is great for gaming, but its not a must.

 

My laptop specs are in my sig.

Do you think it's worth it for me to upgrade my CPU given those specs?

Upgrading my gpu is not on option.

Should I just overclock my cpu?

Should I pay a lot to upgrade to the 3ghz core 2 duo, or upgrade to a 2.53ghz one?

 

My 3.6GHz C2D did not max out BC2 even with a 5870. Performance was abysmal. GTA IV cannot be run on a C2D and look anywhere near good. Flight Simulator X can't be run on a C2D on medium or high settings.

Quad-cores are the minimum standard for gaming, get used to it and accept it. IF you get a dual-core for gaming nowadays, you will be sorely dissapointed.

 

I'll have to re-run my Crysis demo to check the fps I was getting. I can say it ran great max'ed for me when I played it @ 1920x1200 on my HP 8740w, i7-720 quad cpu & ATI M7820 gpu. I just don't know what fps I was getting, but it seemed high enough for me. All CPU cores were busy, but I don't recall any periods of max'ed utilization other than short spurts. Not sure what it proves tho other than you can't go wrong with more power as both my cpu and gpu are near the top of the [mobile] heap.

 

Ha ha tell that to my C2D X9000 @ 3.8GHz. Bad Company 2 runs awesome, GTA IV runs awesome with just one single 8800m GTX, Just Cause 2 runs awesome and all at high settings and 1920x1200.

Since I upgraded from my T7700 2.4GHz C2D to an X9000 now running all daily at 3.8GHz all games suddenly feels much much smoother. So it definitely gave a boost to my XPS M1730.

For Mafia 2 a Quad Core is also recommended, however this is how it runs on my X9000 now

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzXudu41AWQ

This is how GTA IV ran on my T7700 CPU:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ta3y6AO00tg

 

Yes a C2D still works great in games.

 

Please tone down the comments, they are starting to get out of hand . . . thanks.

You are taking things a bit far. Your experience != everyone else's; don't be overbearing and put forth your opinion as fact. It doesn't look good.

 

Again, I'm not talking about high end desktop's here.

My laptop specs are in my sig. As you can see all I have is a ATI 4650.

Do you think it's worth it for me to upgrade my CPU given those specs?

Upgrading my gpu is not on option.

Should I just overclock my cpu?

Should I pay a lot to upgrade to the 3ghz core 2 duo, or upgrade to a 2.53ghz one?

 

big eazy, my laptop will probably last a bit longer now with the X9000 inside. I bought the laptop for over 2 years go and it still going strong. Though I just upgraded recently a month ago to the X9000 CPU.

 

I agree with big-easy, just overclock it! I was in the same boat like you, was planning to upgrade my p8400 2.26Ghz to a x9100 3.06Ghz, until I gave up the thought and overclock my currrent p8400 and leave the OC on 24/7, depends on the usage, I overclock it 2.5Ghz(all the time) and 2.73Ghz(in CPU intensive games like SC2/Dragon age). The performance gain is quite substantial and the money you saved(around 300$ in my case) from an upgrade could go into your next purchase of a new laptop!!

 

*huggles 3.33ghz x9100*



Acer have locked up the system pretty tight so it was my only option, otherwise I would have stuck with the p8700 I had.

 

big eazy, yes I am trying 3.6 vs 3.8 now and see what difference I get with 200Mhz less, if any at all I might settle with 3.6 then.

 

Did I miss something here, over 5000000 votes for the second option, but the thread has been viewed under 3000 times?

EDIT: I see what happened here.


I wish I had a quad core.

 

I play sc2 all the time with my core2duo T9600. Medium settings, no issue. I also watch 1080p videos fine...

 

YouTube - GTA 4 HIGH settings - P-6860FX X9000 @ 3.6 GHz 8800m GTS

A dual core still does just fine. I still want a quad core but it is not a minimum.

 

It's too bad this poll got hacked. This is an important question for a lot of c2d owners considering an upgrade.

 

LOL. Typical hackers. Always out to destroy things instead of concealing the hack by adding a small increase in the option they would like to see win