Originally Posted by dr_bowtie
not really so....
as I have pointed out I own 6 AMD (AM2) rigs and 1 Intel rig (Q6700) and while the Intel rig is faster at 99% of things it's not really faster in some things like gaming....
Biostar 7050-M2 HDMI
SataI 74gig (71kb/s)
loads faster in some games than this rig....
Asus P5E-VM HDMI
Sata II 640 AAKS (95kb/s)
I cannot tell you why the AMD rig loads faster but it does.....but only by a second or 2
when gaming you cant tell a difference between the 2 rigs....
both are on fresh installs with latest drivers (fastest drivers at that)
You can't compare different rigs with entirely different components and come to the conclusion that the one that loads a game faster does so because of the CPU. There are so many other factors to consider--in addition to disk speeds. RAM bandwidth, disk controller bandwidths, FSB speeds, memory controller, etc.
Re: OP--why not? If I had an AM2/AM2+ X2 rig, and I wanted to go quad-core, I wouldn't buy a completely new motherboard, CPU (and possibly RAM, though not necessarily) to do so--that would be a waste when one can spend a couple hundred bucks (give or take) and have a new quad core--as opposed to spending a couple hundred bucks for a C2Q, a hundred bucks for a new mobo that's capable of OC'ing it, (and possibly RAM, though not necessarily). Unless someone wanted to experience a C2Q system--which is fine--there's no point. The performance, while intel is faster now, is not HUGE--it's not like going from a single-core pentiumD to a C2D or C2Q. So it's not black and white, but rather varying shades of gray right now.