1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Slightly confused

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by greenbrucelee, Jan 29, 2008.

  1. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    I was just wondering I am going to build a system in the summer and a processor question keeps bugging me. I am either going to get one of these http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?IL-E6850 or one of these http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?IL-Q6600O

    I am wanting a processor that is fast so am I correct in thinking that the C2D processor is the better one because it has a higher clock speed and front side bus than the quad core processor?

    or do the amount of cores actually make a bigger difference?
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?
  2. simongrahamuk
    Honorary Member

    simongrahamuk Hmmmmmmm?

    6,199
    125
    199
    I'd say that the quad core would be better because it is actually like having 4 processors in your system rather than the two that the dual core would offer you.

    Personally I would rather have more slightly slower processors than less slightly faster ones.

    Note that I am no hardware guru though! I can't even remember the last time I built, ore even looked into building a system!

    8)
     
  3. sunn

    sunn Gigabyte Poster

    1,562
    24
    79
    I agree with simongrahamuk. I don't need faster; I want more things happening concurrently. Then again, it’s been forever since I’ve even built a system. :rolleyes:
     
  4. onoski

    onoski Terabyte Poster

    3,120
    51
    154
    The Quad would seem like a reasonable processor to go for considering its like two processors in one.
     
    Certifications: MCSE: 2003, MCSA: 2003 Messaging, MCP, HNC BIT, ITIL Fdn V3, SDI Fdn, VCP 4 & VCP 5
    WIP: MCTS:70-236, PowerShell
  5. JohnBradbury

    JohnBradbury Kilobyte Poster

    372
    39
    52
    I'm currently using a Quad Core Q6600 on this machine and it's a beast. You have the 8mb cache and VT support for virtualisation.
     
  6. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    Cheers for the input guys, so even though the C2D is faster the quad core will handle more data at the same time?

    So quad is better because of the larger cache and cores?

    Quad it is then :)
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?
  7. Modey

    Modey Terabyte Poster

    2,397
    99
    154
    You get the VT support in most C2D's as well as the Quad Cores.

    At the moment, in terms of gaming performance there is no real benefit to having a Quad vs a Dual core system. Very few games have any multithreaded capabilty at the moment.

    If on the other hand you intend to use it for Virtual Machines, Video Editing, or say Photo Editing then you would get much more use out of a Quad core system.
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCP, MCDST, MCSA 2K3, MCTS, MOS, MTA, MCT, MCITP:EDST7, MCSA W7, Citrix CCA, ITIL Foundation
    WIP: Nada
  8. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    I will go virtual PCs when I do other certs and also I want a fast gaming machine and this PC I build will become my main system.
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?
  9. Sparky
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    Sparky Zettabyte Poster Moderator

    10,189
    296
    319
    Your old PC could be used as a server for testing,you get a trial version of Server 2003 with most of the MS Press books for the MCSE. 8)
     
    Certifications: MSc MCSE MCSA:M MCSA:S MCITP:EA MCTS(x5) Security+ Network+ A+
    WIP: Exchange 2007\2010
  10. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    The MCSE is a long way off for me if I ever do it, I do plan to go certwise upto MCSA but am not sure about MCSE I need a career first though before going any further after I pass my A+.
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?
  11. Sparky
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    Sparky Zettabyte Poster Moderator

    10,189
    296
    319
    Ahh, I see. Still useful for the 70-270 as you need to be able to setup a RIS server.
     
    Certifications: MSc MCSE MCSA:M MCSA:S MCITP:EA MCTS(x5) Security+ Network+ A+
    WIP: Exchange 2007\2010
  12. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    How difficult would the 70-270 be without on the job experience if this was the next cert I did after my A+?
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?
  13. BosonMichael
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,136
    462
    374
    It depends on whether your games are optimized for a single processor or multiple processors. If multiple, you'd be better off with the quad-core. It's probably hard to say which would be better for you... Eventually, multi-processor-capable apps will be standard... so the more cores, the better.

    That said, either way you go, you'll likely have a good experience. I've got a C2D running at 1.83 GHz and I haven't seen my PC as much as hiccup... absolutely no slowness whatsoever, even with multiple things going on. You'd do fine with either option.
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  14. BosonMichael
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,136
    462
    374
    70-270's on the MCSA track. I'd recommend getting your feet wet with 70-271 + 70-272 (MCDST) first.
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  15. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    If I was still without a job in IT by the time I went for my next cert would the MCDST be passable without real world experience? just with hard study and a bit of common sense? and are there any hardware exclusive certs at all? as it seems to me that hardware is my strongest point as opposed to software.
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?
  16. JohnBradbury

    JohnBradbury Kilobyte Poster

    372
    39
    52
    Absolutely ...

    Just get plenty of hands on experience in your lab environment. As long as you know the product inside and out it doesn't matter whether the experience was job based or lab based.

    A lot of major hardware vendors offer certification tracks. IBM and HP offer courses for their desktop and server products. In fact I've known a few IBM certified guys who earned a pretty good salary.
     
  17. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    I'll do MCDST next then or at least one of the exams if I haven't got a job by then hopefully getting an MCP will enhance my prospects :)
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?
  18. Sparky
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    Sparky Zettabyte Poster Moderator

    10,189
    296
    319
    Yup and you could probably do the 70-270 as well if you really wanted to. In reard to just hardware only certs some companies (e.g) have certs for their tech. This can be how to replace the screen on a laptop (not easy btw!)

    http://dcse.dell.com/DCSEProgDef.asp
     
    Certifications: MSc MCSE MCSA:M MCSA:S MCITP:EA MCTS(x5) Security+ Network+ A+
    WIP: Exchange 2007\2010
  19. noelg24

    noelg24 Terabyte Poster

    3,334
    26
    139
    GBL...as much I hate to admit it...the quad core would be your best bet...plenty of processor power...or you could do what I have done...build your main machine and then save up more cash to build a gaming machine...I had my main machine for a year before building my gaming machine (although technically I started buying the parts for my gaming machine around august 2007)

    and also yes use ur old machine for a server...I just found out my PC I build 4yrs ago who I gave to a friend is on its last legs (so im building them a new one soon). I am getting that PC back (no way would I allow them to throw it away!!) and I will use it to make my server machine (blimey 4 computers under one roof :eek: )

    But in terms of CPU mate, the quad core for sure :biggrin
     
    Certifications: A+
    WIP: my life
  20. greenbrucelee
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    greenbrucelee Zettabyte Poster

    14,283
    254
    329
    Cheers for that and the link, that looks like quite an interesting cert.

    Quad core it is then :D
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCDST, Security+, 70-270
    WIP: 70-620 or 70-680?

Share This Page

Loading...