Dual Core Vs. 64 bit

As of right now, it seems that it's either one or the other. Either I get a laptop with a dual core CPU, or a laptop with a 64 bit CPU. Which one would be the best choice for a lappy that will last me the longest? From what I've seen so far, the only advantage of the dual core CPUs is in the multitasking department, while the 64 bit CPUs (most notably the AMD Turion series) only has an advantage with programs specifically designed for it (Windows Vista, and whatever other programs are out there for 64 bit CPUs). Now I want a laptop that will last me the longest. The dual core seems optional, as it will never be required to run something, while the 64 bit CPU will run some programs better now, but it is still a little ways off before it's mainstream.

So which way is better to go? Dual core, or 64 bit? I want my laptop to last me through college if possible (so figure 3-4 years). Thanks!

 

For longest possible life, 64bit is probably going to be better than dual core, however until we see Vista or really any other mainstream 64bit applications who knows if the current 64Bit processors will be upto the task.

 

If you won't be rendering or photo or video editing or encoding much, the Turion would probably be the better choice, IMO. Now this has been debated to death on here and it depends on what you need. In 3-4 years which is what almost everyone replaces their notebook within, the dual-core would work for you also. But generally, the Turions are cheaper than Intels processors, and if you just need it for basic functions, the Turion will work fine, plus have the future 64-bit software covered....blah...blah........

Matt

 

the new Turion 64 X2s have been announced and will be out soon

 

Frankly...I wouldn't decide by processor. I'd decide what i need the laptop to do, then get the machine that will do it. You rarely find two machines configured the same way, with one having a Core Duo and the other having a Turion. Both processors are perfectly capable for the next 3 years.

 

I'm finding my turion more than fine, it handles multi apps better than my p-m but not sure how it comapares to a core duo. Overall they all do the same thing at the end of the day (unless you really want to use a 64 bit OS). The real benifts will only come to play when programmers really start coding for the technologies. ie, multi threaded and 64bit code.

To me , battery life is higher on my priority list over performance, as they will all do the same thing. One might just take a little longer

insane

 

I am in sort of the same dilema, but I am not letting CPU be the main decider. Quality is more important for me. But here is what I think about the CPU.

Thanks to AMD's release of their dual cores (desktops) since a while back, many software have developed with the capability of making use of multi-processors. So right now I can make use of core duo, although not 100% of the time! As for 64bit, I guess by the time it becomes a necessity (about 2 years from now) the notebook that I am buying now would already be too slow and maybe an upgrade would be a good idea by then.

Since my use leans more towards CPU intensive applications (some of which developed to make use of multi-processing) the duo has a bit of an edge, and the price aint bad at all for new technology! But that doesn't mean I won't get a Turion if I found a good deal. But for now I feel I am getting more for my buck with duo!

 

But the thing is, I can't afford to get a new notebook in 2 years. I need this notebook to last me 4 years. The only application that I know of running 64 bit is windows vista when it comes out, but it will also run 32 bit but with less performance.

Would it be best to get a dual core and upgrade to a 64 bit dual core when they become available, or is 64 bit the future requirment and dual core is the fancy but uneeded accesory.

 

In my opinion, Dual cores would give you the most immediate benefit. There are more programs written that will take advantage of dual cores than there are programs that take advantage of 64-bit.
Nvidia's last several driver releases have been optimized for dual core. Many new games have or can be patched to take advantage of dual core.
And even if the software is not specifically written for dual core, you can get an advantage because you can assign one core to that program, and let the other core handle windows and other background processes. Plus, if you run multiple programs, like many office workers or programmers do, you can put some programs on one core, and other programs on the other core. Thereby splitting the overall load on your PC.
Whereas, outside of a Windows OS that is still in beta, Windows Server, some Linux distros, and a few other (mostly server) software packages, there is not much written that actually takes full advantage of 64-bit technology.

Obviously, things change. But it would currently seem that things are being pushed for dual core more than 64-bit. And for at least the next 3-4 years, you are likely to get more benefit out of dual core than from 64-bit.

 

No one knows if vista will run better or the same on 64bit. It is all speculation.

No one is sure if duo 32bit is upgradable to duo 64bit.

The future is not only 64bit but also multi processing, since both manufacturers have hit speed limits (manufacturing-wise) and the only somlution is multi-processing. 2007 promises quad cores ... so I guess it's not just an extra.

Personally I am favoring duo because I can start benifiting today, but that all depends on your usage.

And one last thing. Are you sure you will want to upgrade to Vista at the time it comes out. I won't, that is why I am worrying less about it. I will stick with XP and a bit of linux until programs that I use force me to upgrade!