Originally Posted by CravinR1
The posts in this thread are stupid.
I have a Q6600 oc'd to 3.2 ghz AND a E6400 @ 3.2 ghz
The E6400 has more cache, but other than that is very similar to your cpu (especially since you have a 200 mhz OC)
Long story short. The 5770 has been in both the q6600 and the E6400 and both perform the same in game.
Currently my E6400 @ 3.2 ghz has a GTX 260 and I play SC2 maxed out on Extreme.
Even at 3.7ghz my E5200 was a bottleneck for my 5770. It wasn't "fully unleashed" until I got an i5. "In game" is a meaningless statement: WHAT game. In Doom 3? Yeah, I guess. In BFBC2? Bottleneck city.
Originally Posted by edalbkrad
Try running GTA IV on both cpu's using the HD5770 and you will see the difference between quad and dualcore.
Yep. Huge difference in GTA 4 when I moved from duallie to i5. Same goes for BFBC2.
Originally Posted by Lifeshield
Well obviously for games that utilize quad cores a quad core would run better. That's hardly rocket science is it?
Well, obviously. But many of the games he's playing -need- quads to run well. It's not rocket science to figure out he would see little to no benefit in those games, now is it?
Even more important, he specified needing more FPS on BFBC2 A better GPU isn't going to help there. Not until he gets a quad at least.
Why does it refuse to let me edit my post..?Edited by pursuinginsanity - 12/15/11 at 2:17am