If I have a 3.00GHz CPU, does each core have 3 GHz making it 6 GHz total? Or is that 3 GHz split up into two parts, each having 1.5 GHz each?

Each core will put out 3GHz at the same time when needed, but speed remains at 3GHz when both cores are working, not double.
The second core will cut in when required to do additional tasks, not double the speed when performing a single task.

http://www.pugetsystems.com/article...
This may help!

Ok, thanks! Does this apply to quad core too? If like the AMD Phenom 9850? I will have 10GHz when I need it?

An analogy would be if you were using AC electric in your garage and you needed to run more tools. You could connect to another outlet/ciruit. Both would still be supplying 120VAC in the US but the potential amperage would be greater, so you would be able to run more tools.

So, basically, if the system needed it, it could muster up to 10GHz of CPU.

No, using your logic in my analogy using two circuits would mean you were using 240VAC.

The frequency that a core or processor runs at is just one of many factors that determine the amount of work that it can perform.

In your case the processor has two cores (parallel processors). Each runs at 3GHz. They are independently running in parallel, so there is no multiplication of the frequency. Even is you had 10 of these processors they would still only be running at 3GHz. However, in theory, 10 should be able to do 10 times the work of one. If the task at hand only requires the work of one, then only one will work.

Going back to the electric analogy. Voltage x Amperage = Wattage. Substitute 3GHz for your voltage. Double the Amperage and you have double the Wattage.

Wattage being the actual measure of potential energy.

We are getting off here.

A dual core doesn't mean there are two full computers. It means the cpu has basically two complete processors (and it doesn't). The rest of the system is stuck with one of. No matter how theoretical the potential of a dual core it can't perform as a true smp system or two computers.

You will generally get about 150% at best to even a slowdown on some tests.

The problem gets worse on how the program you need was written. Some programs (in fact most) can't use more than one processor. If you had one program running that needed a lot of cpu time the second or more processor might be utilized.

More of a marketing scam than what it seems to be sold as. You will notice the ads are carefully worded.

"Best Practices", Event viewer, host file, perfmon, are in my top 10

So what are you saying? I do a lot of heavy computing, like programing, Video editing, and other stuff. Will a dual or quad core help me?

http://pcpitstop.com/news/dualcore.asp

Yes dual core would help greatly if you do a lot of video editing. But if you are into major video editing like CGI then Quad Cores are the way to go.

"Will a dual or quad core help me?"

It depends on how you use your system. The link above does a fair job of explaining it. Basically, a dual or quad core CPU performs no faster than a single core UNLESS you're multi-tasking or running apps that are optimized for multi-core CPUs.

You don't list your system specs but based on "2.41Ghz-1.25GB", my guess is your current system can't run a dual or quad. And if that's correct, you'll need a complete rebuild...board, CPU, RAM, video card & possibly a new power supply. Windows would have to be reinstalled as well.

Besides the possible advantages of multi-core CPUs, they generally are more efficient and run cooler than many of the single core CPUs with similar speeds.

Thats the reason that I am asking this question: I am building a new machine. I am trying to get a list of the parts I need. Thanks for your answers.

The system that I currently have of course cannot have dual or quad core, that is one of the reasons that I am building a new one.

The reason that I was not descriptive with my systems' specs is because I was not referring to my system I have now, but rather the new system that I am going to build.

I suggest you post back before you buy anything because based on the questions posted here, you appear less than familiar with PC hardware.

Well you will be hard pressed to find any new single cores anymore. Intel and AMD have both phased out single core prduction from their production cycles now. Even the new budget processors, like the Intel Celeron and AMD Sempron are dual cores now.

I am pretty familiar with hardware, I have replaced everything in my current video editing computer besides the MB, as well as others' computers.

I think that I am going to go with the AMD Phenom 9850 BLACK EDITION CPU, and the GIGABYTE GA-MA770-DS3 mobo, and the ECS N9600GT-512MX EDM GeForce 9600GT 512MB graphics card, from what I have read, I think that this is a pretty good combination. Do you guys think so?

You'd be better off building an Intel quad-core system. The Q6600 is slightly cheaper & kills the Phenom.

http://www.legionhardware.com/docum...

If you do video editing you should consider a processor (and complete system) that is designed for that use.

The FX from amd and some intel processors are exactly what you want.

The choice of dual or quad core may still depend on the OS and application you are using.

See what the designers say. "The AMD Quad FX platform with Dual Socket Direct Connect (DSDC) Architecture is ready for the most demanding multi-threaded digital content creation software and for the next wave of incredibly demanding multi-threaded games."

Notice the words multi-threaded.

"Best Practices", Event viewer, host file, perfmon, are in my top 10

I really cannot afford an Intel machine right now, what I am wanting to know is if this setup I have specified will do what I need it to do. You just said that a dual core would be good, why not a quad core?

"I really cannot afford an Intel machine right now"

Huh? The Q6600 is cheaper than the Phenom 9850 & the GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L is cheaper than the GA-MA770-DS3.

btw: I am using the two of the Adobe creative suites and MS Office 2007 pro.

Intel quad system = $310

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 - $220

GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L - $90

AMD quad system = $335

AMD Phenom 9850 BLACK EDITION - $235

GIGABYTE GA-MA770-DS3 - $100

I realize the $25 price difference isn't huge, but the Intel system will perform better & overclock higher than the AMD system.

Would the L3 cache on the AMD Phenom make a difference in performance? Over just the L1 and L2 cache on the Intel?

The numbers don't lie. The Intel quad is faster, cheaper & overclocks higher than the Phenom. The L3 cache is a non-issue.

What about this article? I know that they are testing dual core, but I think that it shows the overall performance of the two brands.

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_...

BTW, what makes Intel better?

You're reading stuff from 2005 a lot has changed since then. Back when that article was posted AMD was the King, so i would disregard that article.

In a nut shell, Intel has a better architecture then AMD does currently.

Ok, I think that I am going to go with an Intel machine. I found a pretty good board to go with the CPU too.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...

I hear of people overclocking the CPU to 3GHz, would I be ok to overclock it to 2.5, 2.6 or 2.8GHz given that I had a decent cooling system?

First, how are your overclocking skills?

Second Core 2 processors overclock extremely well on a stock fan alone and you wouldn't have any trouble overclocking a Core 2 processors Dual Core or Quad Core to 3ghz on stock cooling as long as you have decent airflow going through the case.

Honestly, I have never overclocked, but I have an old machine that I use as a server that I will test it on.

Do you know of any good sources where I can get more info on overclocking?

Overclocking isn't exact an science, it's more trial and error. So this guide should help you.

Newbie Guide To Overclocking.

Link

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cp...

Thanks so much for your help. I am looking forward to my new rig.

"BTW, what makes Intel better?"

...... AMD hasn't had an answer to Intel's continued onslaught for the last couple of years or so .... LOL

-- Intel Core Microarchitecture

-- Low power >> Less heat >> Cooler chips

-- nm technology

-- Overclock-friendly

-- Uber aggressive product pricing

There's some more, but you probably already get the gist!

"I found a pretty good board to go with the CPU too"

I already listed a good board in response #22...why pay $50 more? DDR3 is of little or no benefit at this time. Save your money & invest it in something else, like a good power supply.

I already bought a good 500W Thermaltake PSU. It was not cheap, $70. Don't worry, I got a good one.

It's not just DDR3 that I want, also needed 3 PCI slots instead on two, I have some things that need to go into them.

Wait a second, the one that you showed me does have three PCI slots.

But it does not have 8 SATA ports, that is something that I might want.

I'm trying to decide if the extra 4 SATA ports are worth it.

BTW: is the board that I chose an ok one to be overclocking on?

Are you building a mini server. Why do you need 8 SATA slots?

Most people only need 4 max.

I am not building a server, I already have one, this is going to be my main computer that I use for Video and 3d graphics editing. I need lots of HDDs and drives. I might not need all 8, but I will have to think on that. If I do get this one, I am basically paying an extra $50 just for 4 more SATA ports, over the other board that one of you mentioned.

You should consider a processor and board that are more well suited for your use.

Consider the FX line or the P4 extreme. They are made just for intense multimedia.

"Best Practices", Event viewer, host file, perfmon, are in my top 10

Truth be told, I am not in the market for a $1,000 CPU.

"Consider the FX line or the P4 extreme. They are made just for intense multimedia."

Yeah I guess if this was 2005.

The Phenom outperforms any dual core FX series and the P4 Extreme edition gets rosted by any Core 2 Duo let alone Core 2 Quad. No offesne, but you are 3 years out of touch with what's current.

Wasn't the big draw of the FX series the fact that they shipped unlocked? Other than that there was no other advantage that I know of.

That and they were clocked higher then your avg Athlon, but it looks like AMD is phasing the FX series out in favor of the Black Edition series.

The FX was built for video and photo work.

A place to choose.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/...

The AMD x2 is almost as good for video and photoshop @ $180 as the $1700 intel if you believe them.

"Best Practices", Event viewer, host file, perfmon, are in my top 10

Why are some saying that AMDs are the way to go, and some are saying that the Intels are the best.

This is getting confusing!!!

Right now the opinion seems to be that Intel is the better way to go, but you cannot be 100% sure about the future. AMD has had some problems recently, but that doesn't mean that they won't get their act together and perhaps put out seem better processors than Intel. For now it's probably better to go with Intel-but it's not like you would be making a bad choice with an AMD processor-it depends on which one you would choose.

AMD is better if you are on a budget. Intel is better then AMD performance wise but it also cost more then AMD processors clock for clock.

..... than ≠ then ;-)

Than: a conjunction - used to compare things.

Then: an adverb - used with descriptions of time.

Compulsive: a adjective - A person with behavior patterns governed by a compulsion. :)

If this is going to be a spelling/grammar forum, shouldn't that be "an" adjective ?

Who cares. It's a forum, not a resume. The whole point of this forum is to help people with their computer problems and not to check ones grammar and spelling in the process.

Exactimundo Cobra!

A forum is a channel that embodies a lot of things, not excluding helping; "networking"; learning; sharing knowledge & experiences of all sorts & sometimes even making friends or foes alike .... LOL!

As for me, I am always open to corrections, positive criticisms & dissenting opinions when substantiated or even circumstantial. As far as I know, I probably might stand to gain something from it.

Take it easy mon ami ;-)

I'm sure if anyone starts to spell Cobra_R as Cochran_R, at some point you'll likely point their attention to the spelling too.

Oh & BTW Cobra, remember that IM we both had back & forth about "then" vs "than" maybe about a year ago? My guess is, you sorta still don't believe there's a difference between the two words & that they are just as interchangeable - a habit you need to break.

So, who's on top again AMD or Intel?

Cobra-your correct-uh wait, that should be you're correct(as lomg as the posts are readable, of course). Seriously, the point is that this is NOT a spelling/grammar forum-this forum is to help people with their computer problems, as you pointed out. Now if we can get Sabertooth to agree ?

See Saber, that's where you and I differ a lot. If someone miss-spells my name, but isn't doing it on purpose, even if it's done over and over again, that doesn't bother me. As long as I can read it, then i'm fine with it. We are here to help people out with their "computer" problems and are not here to analyze if they have miss-spelled or miss-used their grammar. It seems like you are the only person on here that truly has an issue with spelling and grammar mistakes and as you can see based on from peoples responses, pointing out spelling and grammar mistakes is a lot more annoying to people then anything else.

I know the diff, but the diff is i'm not compulsive like you are when it comes to spelling and grammar. When this places turns into a Resume Forum let me know, but until then, you need to put your compulsiveness aside and try to focus more on the computer problems at hand.

See, by doing what you have done, we have gone off track from the topic at hand, which also goes against the forum rules. So from now on, you should focus more on the subject at hand and less on the spelling and grammar mistakes, because that's not what we are here for. We are here to help people with their computer problems.

I keep getting emails in my inbox saying that I have gotten a “Computing.net reply”, they turn out to be grammar criticisms.

If you want to criticize the grammar posted on these forums, why don't you send a pm to the person you want to criticize? If it comes down to that, why not just not do it at all? Why not look for someone who actually needs computer help?

Thanks for all of your help by the way.