I can't afford to overhaul my core system to an i7 at the moment. Plus I don't think I would need the power it offers for anything I use my PC for. I'm only playing Crysis 2 right now and only BF3 looks like a future purchase.

@maZiix My CPU is an e6300. Stock speed is 1.86 so I already have a significant overclock on it - using the AC Freeze Pro 7 Yes, that's a great little cooler. My idle is 35c and load is 55c.

@kwikfingerz My GTX 460 is also clocked to 850mhz/1950mhz. I did an experiment yesterday - setting the max fps to 40 and monitoring the GPU load with GPUz it barely went above 65%.

@Cinerir looking at what people have posted here and elsewhere, the performance benefit you're seeing is likely due to your Quad.

My performance is pretty good at the moment. 90% of the time I'm over 30fps. Only Orbital strikes and destruction seem to hurt my CPU. My mobo will take a quad cpu so I wondered if a fairly cheap upgrade could raise my minimum fps past 30. A q6600 g0 clocked to around 3-3.2ghz. This would only cost me ￡60. I think it looks like a worthwhile upgrade.

Thanks for the contributions.

since we all know the obvious that 4 cores are potentially better than 2 cores (if utilized by the application), the only thing that comes to mind is price. As far as i know ?nd yes i play crysis on laptop", you can probably get better bang for your buck if you go lets say with an i5 2.3 ghz rather than i7 thats 1.6 ghz. Now im speaking from the point of view of laptop and moeny constraint. You get almost the same result in applications that only utilize 2 cores , respectivelly 4 threads and also usually create less heat if they are based of the same chipset which leaves you with more place to overclock.

But as final verdict , if money is not an issue i would go fro i7. You can specify cores on which you use your video recording software and leave the rest for the game.

EDIT:
Sorry didnt read the full thread, since money is an issue and your mobo can not take an i7 the uprage you mentioned seems fitting .

Basically what codename said. He knows his PC regardless of how much hypocripsy he has exposed throughout the forums.

I suggest you get a quad core right now. Or a six core....


see a six core isn't really the best bet mate. yes it has more cores but what use is that to you if the game only utilizes maximum of 4?

I am treating the six cored processors like the triple core... Once an eight-core comes out six cores will be made redundant

Crysis 2 has excellent quad core support, at least in single player.

Actually Crytek should be applauded for making their engine scale so well. Other modern games do not do so well (for example Shogun 2).

On maximum detail the game can be very CPU intensive, I would say that you need a fast quad core to avoid bottle necking a high end GPU.

@maZiix My CPU is an e6300. Stock speed is 1.86 so I already have a significant overclock on it - using the AC Freeze Pro 7 Yes, that's a great little cooler. My idle is 35c and load is 55c.



Thanks for the contributions.

In your situation you have 3 cheap options that can run C2/BF3 very nicely:

1* Buy cheap core2duo (e7500 recommended) then overclock to 4.0ghz since u have the AC freeze. This will deffo run BF3 and Crysis2 60+ fps max settings dx9/10 with your 460.

2* Buy cheap quadcore q8300/q8400 then overclock to 3.2ghz. (if OC to 3.2ghz get you no results then OC to 3.7 - 4.0)

3* Buy cheap intel i3 dualcore then overclock to 4.0ghz and you will deffo get 100-120 fps on Crysis 2.

Some guy has the intel i3 530 2.93ghz Oc'd at 4.0ghz/HD6850 and his getting 100-120 fps on Crysis 2.

video links - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCiMmmSvaEg / http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAX7kImsT0E