Quad Cores and Gaming Yes or No

[omega2k1]

Hi, guys. I'm getting ready to get a new gaming notebook and i have options on choosing a dual core or a quad core. I want to know if quad cores r worth it for gaming or should stick with the dual cores?

[zipper]

I think the 2 extra cores very seldom give you anything extra - more important is the clock speed when gaming. But the GFX card is usually the weakest point.

[omega2k1]

yah, i usually go for the clock speed. especial a high fsb. the dual core has a 1333 fsb @ 3.13Gh while the quad has only 1066 @ 2.4Gh.

[Bill]

Quad cores can be very good for gaming, especially properly optimized games like UT3. Even for games that only run on 2 cores, you will still have extra cores available for background tasks, like windows. More and more games are supporting quad cores and/or Unreal Engine 3, so the quad core gaming experience will get better and better over the next year or 2.

And laptops like the D901C can run quad 3 GHz CPUs, which run circles around any laptop dual core.

I'd highly recommend a D901C with a quad and a SLI 9800M GT/GTX setup. (I think they will be relaunching the 9800M GTs in a few weeks with 1 GB each, so I'd wait on those to come back out)

You can also overclock a Q6600 to 3 GHz in the D901C and it runs stable. That quad is good enough for gaming and is under $200 now.

[omega2k1]

so even if the the fsb being 1066 for the quad core and 1333 for the dual, it still be better to get the quad? also would it be worth it to get the 2gb 9800m gtx sli gpu for games like crysis and gta 5?

[dreadlord369]

You do mean Gta 4 right????

[omega2k1]

lol, yah, i get those roman numerals confused. lol

[Bill]

The GTX SLI setup is about $700 extra with only about 15% performance improvement (if any) so its up to you if that is worth it.

The newer quad cores all have 1333 MHz FSB. I would go for the 2.8 GHz newer model (Q9550) if the Q6600 isn't good enough for you.

The FSB difference doesn't matter anyway with the RAM limitations the D901C has.

I would go for either 2 GB dual channel with XP 32bit or 4 GB dual channel if your gonna use XP64 bit. Those are the best OS choices for the laptop.

If I were you I would also get 3x320 GB hard drives in either a RAID0 or RAID5 setup. It doesn't matter much if they are 5400 RPM either. (once you raid them)

[omega2k1]

thanks. now with the motherboard chipset, would i be able to use 3gb of ram in 32bit os? also, im looking at your specs to the left do. do you have the 8700m gt of the 9800m gtx 1gb. if you have the 9800m gtx 1 gb, what is you crysis 1 and 2, fallout 3 and farcry 2 experience @ medium, high and max settings @ 1080p and 1920*1200? and far as raid, i still trying to get a better understanding of it. i've spent about 2 hours last night researching. so basically what i think i understand is that with raid 0=full capacity ex: 3*320=960gb with better read/write with no fault protection. raid 1=3*320=640gb with backup and fast read/write. and raid 5=3*320=640 with best read/write with best backup. let me know if im wrong.

Edited November 16, 2008 by omega2k1

[Bill]

I have the older 512MB 8700M GTs, the 9800M GT (~equivalent to a 8800M GTX) is about 50% faster. (mainly cause of 96 stream processors instead of 32, 9800M GTX has 112)

In 3Dmark terms, with overclocking the SLI setup I have can reach over 10k in 3Dmark06, and a SLI 9800M GT setup can break 15k. Without overclocking the best I have gotten is ~9200. I haven't done too much benchmarking though. (I can probably go higher without overclocking the graphics card, like fine tuning processes/drivers/better CPU/CPU overclocking)

A single 9800M GT can break 9.5k without OCing I think, a single 9800M GTX can break maybe 10.5k if your lucky with OCing.

You have the general idea about the RAID stuff. However RAID1 is usually used with 2 drives or two RAID0 setups, ect. I guess you could RAID1 three of those drivers, but you would only have 320GB.

I would go with the RAID5, or a RAID0 with an external backup drive (thats what I have)

If figure since its a laptop, it could get dropped/shaken/stolen and the whole RAID5/RAID0 could go down.

So I just have a full backup on a desktop hard drive and a very very fast RAID0. No matter what drives you get for this laptop a 3 drive RAID0/RAID5 would be really fast. I would get one of those, and the biggest capacity drive you can afford. The 500 GB drives probably aren't that much more expensive now. You could have a 1 TB RAID5 or 1.5 TB RAID0 nowadays. (they only had 250GB drives last year)

RAID0 actually has better speeds than RAID5, but if the RAID chipset is good, there won't be that much difference from a 3 drive RAID5 to a 2 drive RAID0.

My guess is a RAID5 for you would get about 65-80 MB/s average read and a RAID0 with newer drives probably 105-120 MB/s average read. (depending on 5400/7200 RPM and drive density)

So really it depends on whether you want the backup data internal to your laptop (RAID5) or external backup with more usable space. If its external you won't lose the data if the laptop gets stolen. Also if the laptop's mobo breaks/operating system fails you can't read the RAID data anymore, since its hardware/OS dependent. If you had a 3x500 GB RAID0 and had it back up on a single desktop 1.5 TB SATA drive and the RAID failed you would have easy access to your backup data.

For the RAM if you want more than 2 GB, I would just go with 4 GB dual channel, it shouldn't have any real negative effect on performance in 32bit XP. I had no problems getting any of the hardware inside my laptop to work in 64bit XP so I recommend you try that if you want lots of RAM. I think Crysis even runs faster too.

The D901C can't use more than about 6.2 GB even though you can fit 8 GB in there. (chipset limitation) So you can actually stick a 4 GB and a 2 GB stick in there and have 6 GB, and 4 GB of it will be dual channel. (The 4 GB sticks are expensive)

This should work with 3 GB too, you could get a 2 GB stick and a 1 GB stick, but only 2 GB would be dual channel.

A lot of resellers don't have 9800M GTs anymore, they stopped making them. The rumor is that nvidia will have an improved 1 GB 9800M GT soon. Even if its not much faster, it will be made on a smaller process technology and generate less heat. This will mean the laptop would have longer battery life, AND it could theoretically overclock higher.

You could get the 9800M GTS but it lacks stream processors and overclocking potential.

My guess is we will see the new cards by the beginning of December.

[omega2k1]

thanks for your help. so in just gaming performance, 64bit out shines 32bit. also would you know any specific website that sell mxm cards or any other places.

[Bill]

In newer games they might have noticeable improvement. In my case I probably just have less stuff installed on my 64bit install. (or 64bit is more streamlined due to newer server codebase?)

Right now the only real advantage going to 64bit XP is maybe certain rendering programs, and programs that can use more than 3 GB of RAM.

Anyway the best place to buy newer vid cards for the D901C is the clevo resellers. So sager, powernotes, ect can all hook you up with the GTX series cards if/when they come out. (the next nvidia cards will have names like GTX 110, GTX 120, maybe mobile will be GTX 120M?)

The relaunched nvidia cards that are rumored will probably be renamed.

[omega2k1]

i checked those two sites and i didn't see a section were the sold just the cards. maybe i over looked something. anywhere wouldn't a dual 9800m gtx 512mb(2) be better that a single chip?

[Bill]

The resellers will sell you the cards IF they have them in stock. Nvidia just discontinued both the 9800M GTs and the GTS cards and its kinda strange.

Anyway you have to call/email the resellers to buy the cards individually. Also you need to get the cards configured a special way for SLI. The second card needs a different BIOS than the first.

Of course an SLI setup is better than a single card, unless your comparing a 9800M GTX to dual 8700M GTs or something.

I would pick a 9800M GT SLI setup if I had the choice again. The 9800M GTX is just too expensive.

[omega2k1]

hey, i found this site that sell mxm cards: http://www.eurocom.com/. when you go their click on the support link then to upgrade center the to accessories.

[Bill]

They are a euro clevo reseller. However their prices for graphics cards seem a bit high, at least in USD.

I bet if you called Sager on the phone (if your in the US) and asked for a quote on the 9800M GT SLI it will be a lot less than $1200. (if they have any left in stock)

Other resellers should be able to sell you that for only $1000. $1200 seems like a rip off to me. (in addition to international shipping)

[melon]

NO

quad is useless as today's games are made on single or dual core in mind.

try google some performance benchmark quad VS dual.

FSB DO matters. ie 3.2 GHz at 333x9.5 is better than 3.2 GHz at 266x12

[Bill]

My UT3 says otherwise.