Quad 2.4 or Duo 3.0?

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by jmiles301, Dec 30, 2008.

  1. Just curious what others opinions are on building/buying a system for trading with a quad 2.4 vs a duo 3.0 (or similar combination, assuming same type of processor, just different speed)? I've been reading mixed views so thought that I would see what others thought on this board...
  2. I'm currently running an Intel E8200 Core 2 Duo at 2.66 with a 6MB L2 cache and 4 gigs of RAM in a Dell T3400 Precision Workstation.

    Can't complain whatsoever.
    Besides, most trading platforms run pretty thin anyway and don't require a lot of processor capability. The software isn't even written to take advantage of a quad-core!
  3. DmanX

    DmanX Guest

    Let's say that you're daytrading and running Ninja Trader and watching a few symbols on charts that have a few indicators each. And you're running a tick feed like Zenfire. And you browse the web during idle times.

    In this instance, The Duo would be more than adequate.

    If you're watching many symbols, with lots of charts each having numerous indicators...

    Quad core.
  4. What about the new Intel i7 chipset? I'm seeing a model for around $300. Apparently has HyperThreading again.
  5. DmanX

    DmanX Guest

    It's even better. When it comes to computing power, you can never have too much of a good thing...

    Unless you're just wasting watts...
  6. Well, I'm trying to avoid running into overkill and overpaying for a system.

    Generally, I will have open between 10-15 individual charts (just candlesticks, MA's, and volume... nothing fancy) with another 6-10 quote boards (displaying roughly 50-100 individual stocks), all requiring real-time streaming, quote-by-quote data (through esignal). All of that, plus Trade Ideas running alongside it. That, and having open multiple browsers is about it for me...
  7. Same as the Core 2 Duo series, but the major change is that they removed the FSB from the processor. This communication bus ( the FSB ) runs at a set MHz and is determined by the architecture used. This bus allows the CPU to send data to and from the system memory via the Northbridge.

    Intel's "i7" Nehalem replaces the aging FSB with a new point-to-point communication protocol which is known as Quick Path Interconnect, QPI.

    By moving the memory controller on to the CPU die, you can obtain a much higher bandwidth than possible using the FSB method. AMD was the innovator in this area.

    LG1366 socket, which requires the Intel X58 motherboard, I believe.
    The "i7" 920 Nehalem at 2.66 GHz is $295 at New Egg.

    And yes, Hyper Threading makes a comeback in the "i7".

  8. DmanX

    DmanX Guest

    Without a doubt, quad core for you.
    Which Quad were you looking @?

    Q9450(12MB L2, 45nm) or Q6700(8MB L2, 65nm)?

    I'd get the Q9450. Good fit for you with room to go. Pair it with 8GB RAM even though you could get away with 4GB.
  9. bespoke


    I disagree. If your application isn't multithreaded (which it probably isn't) then a faster dual core would be better when dealing with more symbols and indicators. I have both and the dual core runs intensive applications faster than the quad core and both are overclocked to their max.

    I would trade my q6600 for a e8400 straight up if someone offered. Seems like a waste to go out and buy a new chip now when I have a perfectly fine one already....

    Edit: unless you're talking about a chip newer than the q6600 (but thats what most prebuilt computers come with)
  10. DmanX

    DmanX Guest

    One key thing you missed was that he was also looking to web browse. While his single trading/charting app might not be multithreaded, running multiple apps will be benefited by having more cores to run each instance of an app.
    #10     Dec 30, 2008