Help me in assembling a Dual-core Machine

Intel Pentium D 2.8 Ghz costs only 12,500/- bucks and AMD 4200-X2 is for around 26,500/- ..the most important criteria is your budget buddy. AMD is the way to go if you want perfomance and Intel if just need your pc to be dual core. The prices will surely fall but nobody can predict exactly when. Dual core is still just gaining ground as there aren't many apps that benefit from it. I dont think prices will really shatter until the release of Windows Vista / dual core usable games /software etc all of which will surely be multithreaded and allow you to use your dual core processor to its full potential. Only then will people see some real perfomance gain. this is just my prediction.

unless u need to work on workstation application, u don't need or benifit from dual core, no games are optimised for it either

if possible, get a Athlon64 3800+ X2, but if u can live without dual core, then get Athlon64 3500+ & Overclock

gxsaurav said:

unless u need to work on workstation application, u don't need or benifit from dual core, no games are optimised for it either

if possible, get a Athlon64 3800+ X2, but if u can live without dual core, then get Athlon64 3500+ & Overclock

Click to expand...

Yaa well said as there currently is no game as such that can utilize dual core processing.

May be in the future there may be some such games but that will take a long time !!!
Still if you are a gamer you can definately go for it !!!

I actually want 2 assemble a machine tht is future proof.applications and games utilizing dual core processing power will come out some time or other.as i plan not 2 upgrade for atleasr 3-4 yrs i thought i might go for a dual core rig.also the price mentioned above for the intel processor is for pentium D 820 or 830?also which motherboard wud u suggest for the intel rig?also how much ram should i opt for and how much will it cost?i have a budget of 30K.

even then it's not requird, i would say that u buy a AMD athlon64 single core PC, as u can buy a thlon64 4800+ X2 3 years later, when u really need it at a really low price compared to today

30k for a dual core machine ??? dats too less dude. is 30k only the budget for the procc and mobo n ram ??

see,
intel pentium d 820 - 12.5k
Intel/Asus 945/955 board - around 8-10k
ddr2 667 mhz 512mb - around 3-4 k (not sure)

or else amd,
amd 3800 x2 - around 20k (not sure)
asus a8n-e - around 5200/-
512*2 DDR 400 - around 5,500/-

if i do go for a single core machine will i get i gud rig(only cpu) for 30K?if yes pls suggest both intel and amd options with prices.

u can try getting the athlon 64 fx processors for around 30k .. they are the best of the best.

hmm, Athlon64 FX is good but uber costly

in my opinion, for a budget of 30,000, u can buy a Athlon64 3500+ Venice with Asus A8N-E motherboard, & 1 GB kingston or hynix RAM, even then u will save money

gxsaurav said:

hmm, Athlon64 FX is good but uber costly

in my opinion, for a budget of 30,000, u can buy a Athlon64 3500+ Venice with Asus A8N-E motherboard, & 1 GB kingston or hynix RAM, even then u will save money

Click to expand...

But then will it be future proof as mentioned by ankurgupta.me, I dont thik it will be able to last more than 2-3 yrs even after geting a good GFX card !!!

2-3 years is what is called future proof dude.. even if it lasts 2 years it is to be called future proof. technology is changing at such a fast rate that its hard to find stuff that will be future proof for even a year now.

exactly i agree with mohit.new proc and mobo is being launched every month or 2 so nothing can b future proof.at MAX it can b for for a year or 2.

@mohit i dont think 925 chipset support dual core proc ,correct me if i m wrong.

955 onwards support Dual core

although amd dual core performs better .. its costly right now .. better go with intel as costs are not that high ... also opt for Asus P5N32-SLI Deluxe-
best motherboard for intel processors right now .. and go for ddr 2 667 memory if possible

intel will run very hot, & again their dual core gives less performance then AMD dual core

For dual core, parallel threads are going on ...
*www.thinkdigit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32989

mohit said:

2-3 years is what is called future proof dude.. even if it lasts 2 years it is to be called future proof. technology is changing at such a fast rate that its hard to find stuff that will be future proof for even a year now.

Click to expand...

Hey I have already mentioned that even if he gets a good GFX card afterwards, so I think getting a new GFX card increases the life of a PC atleast one year or so as you dont have to suffer while playing games as to set settings for fast game play or for good GFX !!!

2-3 yrs??? only thing that might last that long is an alienware system. 2yrs down the thing ll run like a compromise.

Or falcon too hummer !!!

So u people donot recommend me to go for dual core! and of course i am buying the AMD monster for 26,500!! i thought dual core didnot have heating issues therefore it was introduced?

oh sorry i forgot to mention the NOT before buying AMD monster :-O

oh sorry i forgot to mention the NOT before "buying AMD monster"

lord wha r u doin? there is an edit button on top of ur post .use it!!!
ya the bottom line is as gx mentioned go fr AMD 3500+ and overclock.
2 yrs down u can buy that dual core.
that way u save some money and the system ll still b a monster.
i don suggest intel coz i m amd fan.

alright then its final i am goin wid amd athlon64 3500+ Venice with Asus A8N-E motherboard, & 1 GB kingston RAM.thanx a lot for guidin me!!!!!!

And you can buy some other gaget from the money you save from this config !!!

gxsaurav said:

unless u need to work on workstation application, u don't need or benifit from dual core, no games are optimised for it either

if possible, get a Athlon64 3800+ X2, but if u can live without dual core, then get Athlon64 3500+ & Overclock

Click to expand...

not all true... even if u're running no multithreaded apps there are many apps running at a time... consider a case when there's a 1.8Gnz core to do everything .... and u're playing a game... it has more to do than just running a game... bu if u have dual core... 1 core can take care of everything else and 1 core will run ur game with it's full power... so basically i dont think this arguement makes much of a sense to argue that dual cores are not useful.... when they improve performance... when u run ur system ex it it's 3200+ than u have a small lag when u switch between heavy apps.. but not with X23800+ which basically has 2 3200+ tigether...

Aother note... Intel dual cores might seem to be cheap but a poor performers... so there's not point getting them right now...
and the cores communicate via external fsb... so even calling them "dual cores" is not right...

k i admit that in a senario like u hv mentioned, eg. burnin a cd while playin a game or may b something thing else, there ll b diffrence. that ways there ll dif in bench marks 2. but the thing is i don thing u can play 2 really processor intensive app at 1 time. certainly u cant play doom3 n quake 4 at the same time. or run a game and a video editin app at the same time. so practically dual cores ll hv distinct edge in multithreaded app only.
wha say?

well, windows itself is an OS, but to run windows XP U don't need the full 2 GHz of A cpu like athlon64 3200+

the thing is the usage of windows eats a lot less CPU resources, so even if u r using a single core CPU, which for general desktop usage, & gaming is what i prefer over the premium of Dual core

when it comes to Workstation tasks, go for Dual core, that what i still say, for everything else, there is single core, buy dual core only after 2 years

at this point of time going for a dual core is not worth.better go for AMD64 3200+ or 3500+ thats more than enough for almost all kind of work.

Can anybody mention any software which currently supports Dual core processing except for workstation tasks ???

I agree with Hummer. I have to upgrade my system every year.

hmm... dual core does help when ur multitasking .. its a proven fact by many reviewers on the net .. no arguing there .. right now intel dual core seems cheap but its performance is not that earth shattering and also it suffers from heating issues of prescott .. while amd dual core does perform but it costs a bomb .. so no point in getting a dual core right now unless ur very rich ..

also I think most people will go for dual core next year same time .. so no waiting for 2 years .. cos intel is going to release new processors based on brand new architecture ... also vista will be releasing at the same time ..

so most wise decision now will be to get a good mobo which supports both dual and single core processors .. and get a decent single core processor .. intel or amd as per ur choice and liking ..

having said that intel is going to release 65 nm dual core processors code named presler .. range - 2.8 to 3.4 ghz .. so will 945 chipset mobos support presler ? also will new processors based on next gen architecture support 945 mobos ?

anyone ? pls guide ...

Aniruddh said:

at this point of time going for a dual core is not worth.better go for AMD64 3200+ or 3500+ thats more than enough for almost all kind of work.

Click to expand...

Wat bout AMD 3800+ X2 and AMD 4200+ X2 processors are they not worth considerin at this time?how tey perform any idea?wat r their prices?is AMD 3800+X2 better thn AMD 4000+?

X2 3800+ cost around 20k and X2 4200+ around 26k if u can afford it than get it otherwise get a 3500+ which shud come around 11k and at present it will suffice all ur needs and later after few months get a dual core proc as the price will surely come down.get a good mobo like ASUS A8NE,MSI K8N NEO4 Platinum or DFI lanparty Ultra.