Hey guys Im planning on asking for a CPU upgrade this xmas. My dilemma is I don't know that much about CPU's and was wondering if you guys could help make a suggestion for me.
Current specs:
Processor: Intel Pentium D @ 3.17Ghz
Motherboard: ECS NF650iSLIT-A
Memory: 2GB (2x1GB) Kingston DDR2
Video Card: EVGA 9800 GT Dual Slot Cooling Edition 512MB DDR3
HDD: Samsung Spinpoint F3 1 TB with 32MB Cache
PSU: RAIDMAX VOLCANO 630w
OS: Windows 7 x64
Well, making the assumption about what you want to do with your CPU, I recommend an AMD Phenom II 955, with an Asus M3N-HT. The reason I recommend that motherboard is because it allows the use of DDR2, which reduces cost since you already have it.
Phenom II 925, 945, 955 are all fantastic.
Don't even think about buying any intel quads unless you're going for the i7.
For a dual core, either get the core 2 duos, but i still recommend the athlon II dual cores over those. They're cheaper and more overclockable.
Well I don't know if I would call the Athlon II's more overclockable, but they are fast and cheap. They also feature obscenely huge cache sizes.
the 45 nm makes the lower GHZ ones highly overclockable. the ones at like 3.0 dont do as well though
I think I want a quad core but I wasn't really planning on getting a new mobo. My friend suggested a Q8400 to me though. What do you guys think of that one?
Q8400's are pretty good, however they don't overclock well, and don't have as big a chache as the 9 series. But they are quad cores, so it's a good buy.
I think Im gonna get the Q8400. Its compatible with my motherboard, correct?
Actually no, unfortunately only the Nvidia 7 series can run 45nm quad cores, however 45nm dual cores run fine. The same goes for the 680i.
Or a 720, imo quads are a little pointless right now. Most games still only support dual-cores.
Why bother buying a tri core now if you're just going to have to upgrade again later? I also really hate (no offense to you) when people say "Quad cores are useless" or "Quad cores aren't worth the money". If a game only uses 2 cores, that's great, that means your other cores can run Windows, or anything else you do in the background. Like running a p2p torrent, or virus scan. Most computers don't run only the game when it's open, there is always something going on the background.
My friend says he burns and encodes movies with his quad core. 
Yeah see, there you go. I didn't even address the sort of applications that use multithreading and aren't games. 3D modeling, video editing, audio editing, all use quad cores very well.
Oops...I meant to say he encodes and burns while playing games. lol
He must set the affinity to two cores then, because those applications normally use all four.
You're going to have to upgrade later no matter what CPU you buy. Quads are not useless, they just are for gaming 99% of the time. What could you be doing realistically that 3 cores cant handle? I use Photo shop, tab between games, and watch youtube/hulu at the same time. Not tried running a game and a virus scan (did it with my old dual core tho with out much slow down) at the same time with my 720, but thats why people sleep, so they can run their scans without it interfering with anything. Running a scan while you're gaming is a bad idea anyway.
all applications made in the past 3 years, unless they were coded poorly use 4 cores i'd say. quads get things done much faster, however its not like surfing the web will give you a speed increase if you're using a quad core of course.
sorry I didn't know saying "[color=#a6a6a6; font-family: verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px]Quads are not useless, they just are for gaming 99% of the time."Â [color=#ffffff]was hard to understand
[/color]
[/color][color=#000000]
[/color]Their still not needed for GAMES because from the devs point of view its easier for us (which it is) if the games use the GPU as much as possible because its easier to upgrade than a CPU. The only games that actually rec a higher end CPU are FC2, GTA4 (which is due to being a sloppy port) and some RTS game I forgot the name of. Every other game out doesn't utilize the CPU that much, and if they do, they don't rec a high end CPU by any means (eg Source games)
Apparently when I said that I use my PC for more than games, just like everyone else who owns one, didn't quite go with you. I use my PC for video editing, audio editing, 3d modeling, and photo editing. Quad core CPUS are good for all those things. However if I were to be asked in 3 years, "is a GPU or a CPU a better multipurpose upgrade?" I would respond the GPU is.
I edited my post, yeah i fucked up somehow reading your comment. And sure you're right that GPU is more important for games, but that's not the point. Buying an e8400 for example in my opinion is just a stupid idea. If you're going budget then a dual core is alright but anyone who can afford a decent would SHOULD be going quad, because the cpu is used in tons of applications and games, most of them every day applications too. Video editing, photo editing, media encoding, writing files to cds, taking files FROM cds, etc all take advantage of quad core design.
On the game subject, I still argue that any recent game engine uses quad cores to their fullest. Take for example Unreal Engine 3 games, In mass effect i saw a 25 fps average boost when i went from my athlon x2 to my phenom 9950. I saw a 10 fps improvement in STALKER, about a 6-8 fps increase in the Crysis games, and about a 10-15 fps increase in company of heroes. Any console ported game will be heavy on cpu usage, considering they have shitty GPUS and good processors.