Need help w/ a CPU choice

ok, so i'm trying to decide what kinda CPU i want to get. Here's my two choices either a quad core or a dual core. I'll list the specs right below.
Intel® T9800 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Duo 2.93GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache 1066MHz FSB 35 watt ( + 255$ )
-Intel® Q9000 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Quad 2.0GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB 35 watt( + 460$ )
now i know that higher clock speed means better cpu. But which is better in terms of capibility. I'm thinking the 2.93Ghz CPU is but i'm not sure.

 

Higher clock doesn’t always mean better CPU if you are comparing different number of cores. Core 2 Quad will be better; but why do you want such a high end CPU ? $460 is WAY TOO MUCH for just a CPU. Even a T9800 for additional $255 is an overkill if you ask me, what is your base CPU option ?

 

I would buy T9800. The reasons are:

1- It is cheaper
2- It has ~50% higher clock than the other. There are very few applications that can utilize all the 4 cores at the same time. For most of the time, you will be dealing with serial apps (that only needs single core) and you will see the benefit of the higher clock there.


--

 

Seconded. The T9800 will also consume less power and subsequently run cooler. You can always upgrade to a Q9000 when it becomes cheaper if you find yourself needing four cores for whatever application.

 

is the t9800 an ES chip or retail? that is a great deal for a QS version or retail otherwise you may be missing out on some functionality such as temp monitoring if that matters to you.

 

As PhoenixFX pointed out, what are you using the CPU for? If it's just gaming, stick with your basic P8400 or whatever. If you require CPU power for 3D rendering or research calculations (ie. MatLAB), quad core is better as the benefits outweigh the cost.

 

I would get the q9000. Sure its more expensive but you most likely wont feel like upgrading it in the future so just get the overkill and be happy when its subpar in the future.

 

Didn't intel just drop their prices on their processors or was that desktop only?

For gaming a p8400+ will be fine so pick that or your t9800 since most games dont use/need all 4 cores anyways

If you are doing serious rendering work or complicated calculations then the q9000 might be worth it, otherwise dont bother.

 

well what i'm doing is i'm going to a gaming college so thus i need something that can stick with me throughout all of my years here whilst i code on my own pc and build my rendering engines etc. etc. And the base CPU is only like a ~2.0Ghz Dual Core CPU. I was liking the overkill aspect of the 2.93Ghz cpu b/c i've never really had a pc that was worth overclocking and i would've liked to have a quad core CPU but since it had a clock speed of a measely 2Ghz i wasn't thinking about getting it. Basically it's going to be for Gaming, Coding, Rendering, Scripting, and any other kind of game created need i will put it through. Also i'm buying it customized from XoticPC.com so i've got very little idea to that... :/

 

may i ask exactly what machine you are customizing, and in your case the quad core owuld be a waste, just stick with the dual cores

 

FORCE 3551
Built on MSI-1651

that's what i'm configuring b/c it was a decent price, light, and had a nice battery life. Also i have a fair budget to spend and i wanted to get the no dead pixle warranty and a few other things.

 

if you have a fair bit to spend I would also consider the M860TU but I guess its really not light compared to the MSI

(I like your choice though, its probably the laptop ill be getting in a cople months)

alright then DONT GET the super processors, the 9600M GT will be your bottleneck on all the games you play with a processor beyond a p8600 (and even weaker processors probably) Save yourself some money, get the good warranties, the policies, but dont waste money on a processor that will not increase your game performance. The p8600 is a fine processor and if you really want to splurge I guess the p8700 isnt exactly a terrible deal. You really will never even see the difference with those super fast processors unless of course you are compiling HUGE programs maybe or other complicated rendering work.

 

I would go with the dual core. Yeah, the quad core would be utilized in any 3D graphics rendering, but I'm not convinced that a 2.0GHz quad core would give you much of a boost over a 2.9+GHz dual core. If it did, I certainly wouldn't expect it to be enough of a boost to warrant the significant price difference.

 

Agreed with the other posters; stick with the more inexpensive dual-cores. I have a P8400 2.26GHz/3MB L2/1066MHz FSB in my HP with a 9600M-GT and the graphics card is definitely the benchmark. The P8400 will be capable of handling any games you throw at it.

 

ES?! Manufacturer doesn't sell those
It seems like he's customising it from an online store with the "+XXX$" after the intel CPU's




However, i'd choose the T9800, as it'll run cooler and be faster on most applications/games + give you a better batterylife.

 

figured that one out by now

 

yeah this question's been answered now i have a new one...