Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

I'm new to laptops and now that the new DV6's have come out, I have a couple of questions:



1) Is there a big difference in battery life between dual and quad cores? Anybody have any typical battery lives from experience?



2) Is there any battery life difference between a i5 and and I7?



3) Is there going to be noticeable differences in speeds between dual and quad cores when doing normal desktop applications (not video editing) and gaming (Mass Effect 2, Civ V, etc...)?



Thanks for any input you might have!

Reply 1 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

I do not have specific numbers, but an i5 will typically return longer battery life compared to an i7 when the remainder of the unit's specifications are similar. Switchable graphics, hard drive speeds, screen brightness, etc all can have an effect on the battery life.



Dual versus quad cores for regular applications should provide negligible speed differences. In regards to gaming applications, the quad will of course provide better performance with varying degrees depending on the game as certain games are more cpu intensives compared to others.

Reply 2 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

With the current generation and beyond, the only real disadvantage quad cores have is price. Previous quads were poor in the battery life department due to the fact that switchable graphics was not possible with them, but with the current generation this is no longer the case. The dual core might have slightly better battery life, but since the i7 will shut down cores and underclock to save power, I'd be shocked if the difference is much more than 15 minutes. That said, no one here really has experience with the new Sandy Bridge quads and switchable graphics, so it's hard to say for certain. Reviews have shown that good battery life is possible, though.



Most applications and games don't really use quad cores (though Civ V happens to be a notable exception and should take advantage of the cores), but more and more are beginning to use them. This is especially true of games, with most newer demanding games recommending a quad-core. That said, someone is probably going to say that dual cores are better for gaming due to higher clockspeeds. The truth is that CPU speed is rarely a bottleneck over 2GHz, and the quads are actually equal to the duals in clockspeed when factoring Turbo Boost.

Reply 3 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

Thanks for the info. I guess I might as well go for the Quad Core to keep it more up-to-date for a longer period of time.



I suppose if I don't like it, I can send it back and get the dual.

Reply 4 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maverick4 Dual versus quad cores for regular applications should provide negligible speed differences. In regards to gaming applications, the quad will of course provide better performance with varying degrees depending on the game as certain games are more cpu intensives compared to others.

Have to disagree here.



Games universally do not take advantage of more than two cores so if gaming is your priority there's no need for a quad core chip



What a quad core does give you is flexibility and muscle for more demanding tasks. Want to surf the web or edit photos smoothly while doing something multi-threaded like ripping DVD's - get a quad core. Want to leave apps open in the background while you're gaming - get a quad core.



Battery life of quad-cores / dual-cores with current generation chips is similar for light (web) use, but under heavy use like gaming / rendering the quad core will eat battery more quickly. Under full load you're talking 35W TDP for the dual core chips and 45W TDP for quads.

Reply 5 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

Quote:

Originally Posted by grenadier Have to disagree here. Games universally do not take advantage of more than two cores so if gaming is your priority there's no need for a quad core chip What a quad core does give you is flexibility and muscle for more demanding tasks. Want to surf the web or edit photos smoothly while doing something multi-threaded like ripping DVD's - get a quad core. Want to leave apps open in the background while you're gaming - get a quad core. Battery life of quad-cores / dual-cores with current generation chips is similar for light (web) use, but under heavy use like gaming / rendering the quad core will eat battery more quickly. Under full load you're talking 35W TDP for the dual core chips and 45W TDP for quads.

That's why I put the stipulation that performance will vary based on the game because proper coding is required to utilize those additional cores.



Regardless, dual cores have effectively become mainstream (even in cell phones!) and quad cores are following close behind. I would assume that game developers are taking that into consideration and coding their games for multiple cores as we move forward.

Reply 6 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rigwald Thanks for the info. I guess I might as well go for the Quad Core to keep it more up-to-date for a longer period of time. I suppose if I don't like it, I can send it back and get the dual.

Why wouldn't you like it? Only bad thing is they're marginally more expensive. Might as well get the dual if you think you're not going to like quads though...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maverick4 That's why I put the stipulation that performance will vary based on the game because proper coding is required to utilize those additional cores. Regardless, dual cores have effectively become mainstream (even in cell phones!) and quad cores are following close behind. I would assume that game developers are taking that into consideration and coding their games for multiple cores as we move forward.

Yeah, and there have been quite a lot of games that benefit from at least 3 cores for quite a while. The Xbox has 3 CPUs, and the Playstation 8, so engines designed to work on all three platforms pretty much have to be taking into account at least 3 CPUs.

Reply 7 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfpup Why wouldn't you like it? Only bad thing is they're marginally more expensive. Might as well get the dual if you think you're not going to like quads though...

To clarify, if I don't like the battery life. For the most part, it will be plugged in. Only during my travels in Europe this summer will there be longer periods without plug in availability, hence the desire for good battery life. I know HP says they get 5.5 hours on 6 cell. I would hate to get only 3 hours or so. (I have read some horror stories about battery life with older generation i7's and graphics cards.

Reply 8 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

Should be comparable unless you're doing something that really stresses it. Although I wouldn't count on a huge battery life regardless. Just know that even if it is only 3 hours, or 2 hours or whatever, it's not something that would improve switching to a slower chip, since they're able to slow down and shut off parts of the chip that aren't in use anyway.

Reply 9 : Dual Core vs Quad Core Questions

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rigwald To clarify, if I don't like the battery life. For the most part, it will be plugged in. Only during my travels in Europe this summer will there be longer periods without plug in availability, hence the desire for good battery life. I know HP says they get 5.5 hours on 6 cell. I would hate to get only 3 hours or so. (I have read some horror stories about battery life with older generation i7's and graphics cards.

That's only because the old ones had no IGP to switch to. These ones do. Also, as stated above, cores which aren't being used are shut down. That said, battery life estimates are almost always A LOT higher than real-world battery life. Don't expect more than 3.5-4 hours even with a dual core If you get 3 hours, it won't be because of the processor and the only way to get much more will be to



a.) take extremes to to extend battery life (such as turning the brightness down to minimum);

b.) buy the 9-cell; or

c.) look for another laptop with better battery life.