Printable View
Is there a big difference in terms of speed? I'm not a gamer nor a graphic artist. I just want to use for office and online work. So most of the time, I'll be opening different websites, a few downloads, uploading finished layouts and designs. So do you think dual core is just fine to use? About $200 difference I think.
Desktop CPUs are ridiculously fast these days and few office applications make good use of multiple cores. So if there's no resource-intensive killer app in your workflow and money is a factor, go for the cheaper option without a second thought.
I don't think a quad core will be noticeably faster for your kind of work.
Use the extra 200$ to double the RAM or get an SSD if you don't have one.
That is going to be a noticeable improvement.
Others would say that quad core is better but for me , I'm fine with a dual core for my everyday simple task. I guess, quad core is a better choice for multi tasking.
Neither of the two. Why not go for the fastest and updated processor like I5- I7? I believe its a better move. Just my opinion!
RAM and SSD can give you more performance than a processor can usually. Unless you pick an Atom or Celeron. Then you're screwed.
Also, the iX series comes in both dual core and quad cores variants, hence the question is still valid. Of course you should go with an i5/i7, but the dual or quad core variant is the question.
A dual core 4GHz i7 and a quad core 4GHz i7 will run at the same speed, ie. 4GHz. The same basic principle is true for any dual/quad core discussion. So the simple answer to your qusetion is no.
Digging deeper there can be slight differences on heavily used systems. The cores CAN compete with each other for outside resources, RAM, disk/SSD, graphics etc. but under the type of load you are talking about, I doubt that would be an issue. 4 cores fighting for a resource will spend more time waiting than 2, but realistically, the waits will be small.