CPU dual core vs. quad core, CPU. What is the difference between dual core and 4 core?

lz misunderstood, it's not like that, 4 cores are only better than dual cores when dealing with multi-threaded (more than 2 threads) tasks, and at present, except for a few professional tools, there is no software and games that support multi-threaded tasks, so the family uses 2 cores out of 4 cores at all, and when 4 cores are used to process dual-threaded tasks, only 2 cores work, and the frequency of 4 cores is not single-core frequency multiplied by 4, if a program requires it, then dual-core is stronger than 4 cores.

For example, we have 2 hands, and each hand can hold things 10 times in 1 minute, but each hand can only hold one kind of thing, and we can't hold the same item with both hands, and when there is only one thing, we can only hold it with one hand, and the other hand can only be idle, and it can't help the other hand to get it faster, and dual-core and single-core are like these 2 hands and 1 hand, and only when there are 2 different things, 2 hands can hold things faster than one hand, and the same is true for 4-core and dual-core, I don't know how to explain it, do you understand?

In addition, the premise of using multiple cores for multiple tasks at the same time is that each task must have data to be processed, if we just hang 4 QQ and 3 of them do not send and receive information, then it does not occupy the CPU, but occupies memory, which is a mistake for many people to understand multi-core and multi-threaded tasks, and our daily use almost will not make multiple programs need to process data at the same time, even if there are small programs, dual-core enough to afford, and large programs that require 4 cores, our current computer can't carry it at all Or it can only be driven at the limit, so even if there are 4 cores, it is still very slow, and only a single program itself supports multi-threaded core processing of data is the real purpose of multi-core.

The advantage of quad-core is that it is multi-threaded, and there are more programs than dual-core, like our computer, which has so many processes as soon as it is turned on, for example, there are 20 processes at boot, and the four cores average out 5 each, and if you convert it to dual cores, each core shares 10 processes.

To use an analogy, it's like moving something, four people are faster than two people.

Quad-core is only multi-tasking, just E5200 and Q8200, single-task, E5200 may be stronger! When it comes to gaming, the advantage of a high clock is even greater. And now games are basically optimized based on dual cores, so in general, even if you really have four cores, maybe only two cores or even one core really work.

Otherwise, why would the e8400 be more expensive than the q8200 with this dual core!! ...In addition, the most critical aspect of CPU performance is the architecture, and the main frequency and cache are compared in the case of the same architecture.

That's a definite, and it's a multiplier.

4 cores are an inevitable trend in the future.

Hehe,It's the difference between two brains and four two brains,Of course, the more cores, the better.,But in addition to looking at the core,There are also including frequency and cache size.。

Quad-core is advantageous if you run multiple programs. Dual-core running single has something to do. Dual-core is dual-core, and quad-core is quad-core. The recommendation is, of course, quad-core. Later mainstream.