How Many CPU Cores Do You Really Need?
Pretty much any processor you can buy today has multiple cores. Two cores seems to be the defacto standard, however you can get up to 4 cores without breaking the bank, but do you see a worthwhile gain from these additional cores? This article titled “How Many CPU Cores Do You Need?” addresses this very question.
Jumping to the results of the benchmark tests which were run, you can see there is an across the board “real-world” increase when going from one core to two with each additional core offering some benefit. [Note “real-world” in quotes because benchmarks are merely a guesstimation.] Games benefited from the addition of a second core only and applications show respectable gains as each additional core was added. I am ignoring the synthetic results as they are pie in the sky numbers. One thing to keep in mind when looking at the results is multicore CPU’s are just now becoming true commonplace and many applications have some catching up to do in order to take advantage of this.
These are interesting numbers to keep in mind if you are in the market. Personally at this point, I would stick with a two core (unless you are a crazy multi-tasker) as most users probably do not utilize their computers in a way that four cores would be beneficial. On top this, a two core will give you the most bang for the buck as the price points go up exponentially when more cores are added.
What are you takes on this?
Multiple Monitors Or One Big One - Which Is For You?
Read Next
6 thoughts on “How Many CPU Cores Do You Really Need?”
Is the fastest dual core anywhere near as fast as the individual cores of the i7 975?
I’m going to be upgrading to a high end i7 because Microsoft Flight Simulator is heavily CPU dependent and less so GPU dependent. Would it make sense to go with a dual core given MFS does not utilize a quad core? I don’t think it would make sense. My inclination is to go with the CPU whose two cores are going to do the most work regardless of the total number of cores….and I’m pretty sure something like an i7 965 is going to do more work per cycle than any i7 dual core and certainly more work per cycle that a previous generation dual core.
For some people, the individual amount of work that a core does per cycle is what counts and not necessarily the total number of cores. So for some, a quad core does make more sense.
If price is no object, then I’d get the 965. Eventually, you can bet there will be more software that takes full advantage of the extra cores. But, if price is a problem, then there’s probably no reason for you go spend extra to do what you want to do right now.