..:: PCSX2 Forums ::..

High guys and girls

I was upgrading my system to be able to run pcsx2 (althought is worked) because the frame rate was about 18 fps (27%) at full speed ups.

I upgraded my gpu to an Asus NVIDIA GeForce 9400GT and got an extra 2gb ram (i now have 4)with vist ultimate, and got the fps up to 42-49 with 1.5x speed up, but was confused about the CPU (i have a P4 3ghz atm).

I have read so many conflicting posts about Dual core, core 2 duo, and quad core cpu's that i feel like screaming.

Normal dual core is out cause C2D is faster (i think) and costs less where i live (due to demand) and was pondering buying either Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 3.33Ghz or Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.83Ghz.

Althought the quad is 2.83ghz it is a quad so it should be faster than the Duo right? I'm probably wrong about that, lol, thats why i'm asking, also the quad will cost me about $50 less, will the Duo give better results or is a money waster.

Thanks in advance for the advice

Quad Core doesn't give you any speed gain in PCSX2, but will be faster when multitasking with other applications on your PC. In this case I'd actually say go with the Quad, seeing as that CPU is easily overclocked to match the speed of the dual core (which is faster at default speeds) and costs less as well. Also be sure that you have Vista x64, since you won't be able to use all your 4 GBs with a Vista x32.

Thanks Aemony, you realy helped alot, and yes i do have Vista x64.

actually, C2D E8400 is ~30% cheaper and overclocks better, it will be faster in pcsx2 and most games. Quad's are still mostly useless in gaming, you will be left sitting with 2 unused cores. Cant see a point in buying a quad if you need a gaming rig.

If you want to compare quad and dual core, look at speed and not amount of cores. This is repeated in every second thread in this forum, i dont know where your confusion is coming from.

GHz isn't what you should look at as it was determined for quite some years ago that the concept of GHz == speed is false.

mird, seeing as the quad is $50 cheaper I still recommend the quad. That's mainly because of two things, the first is to invest for the future (and that multitasking with more apps is always fun) and the second is because the leftover $50 can be used to buy a better cooling fan with the result that the quad can be more OC'ed than the dual.

Jacojpj, you need to first figure out if you are going to overclock or not. If you don't know how then you should research it now. If you decide you do want to OC, then you're better off going with the quad, but if you don't plan to OC then you should get the dual.

By the way, are you basing your upgrade solely on running PCSX2 better? Or do you also want it to be running other applications and games better too?

(07-01-2009, 12:54 PM)Aemony Wrote: [ -> ]GHz isn't what you should look at as it was determined for quite some years ago that the concept of GHz == speed is false.

mird, seeing as the quad is $50 cheaper I still recommend the quad. That's mainly because of two things, the first is to invest for the future (and that multitasking with more apps is always fun) and the second is because the leftover $50 can be used to buy a better cooling fan with the result that the quad can be more OC'ed than the dual.

Ghz IS what you should be looking for,atleast with PCSX2. There was a very nice thread with detailed tests on a C2D vs a Quad core and in both processors,the FPS were linear to Ghz.

But,for being future proof indeed a quad core might be better at this time,since the price is pretty close to the dual cores

I have 8 core processor. will PCSX work?

The rules that apply to emulation still eludes me...

---

(07-01-2009, 02:21 PM)hjpotter92 Wrote: [ -> ]I have 8 core processor. will PCSX work?

It will only use 2 cores.

I am able to use PCSX to the extremes?