Intel core 2 duo E8400 is enough for video editing

[Axeor]

Hi,
I am planning to upgrade my Dual core E2180 with E8400. I want to change the complete configuration as i will gonna use my pc for video editing. I will mainly use it for photoshop, video encoding. E8400 has 2 core. will it be enough or should i buy Q6600. What you say ?

My configuration
Dual core E2180
Gigabyte p45
2gb ram
Geforce 9800
Windows xp

Thank you in advance.

P.S please dont suggest any AMD processors.

[MattyBoy]

E8400 has 2 core. will it be enough or should i buy Q6600. What you say ?

E8400 is not enough if you are using it for video editing/graphics .you should go with quad. If video editing is your profession then i advise you Q6600. Q6600 is also good for Gaming. Honestly E8400 is not worth for video encoding. I would suggest you to invest money in a quad.

[Baltazar]

You will get more speed with the quad-core as compare to dual-core for converting video. it is worth buying Q6600 if you are converting a lot of videos or else there wouldn't be any huge difference between the two. other process would possibly run slower on the Q6600 compared to the E8400. quad-core processors run at slower clock speeds than dual core.

[Joshua]

Q6600 is the suitable also good but Intel E8400 is much advance in terms of higher clock speed 3.0ghz. where Q6600 has 2.4ghz. but in overclocking overclocking Q6600 easily gain 3.0ghz and 1333 FSB. For Photoshop and video editing go with the Q6600.

[amitb0101]

the 3ghz of e8400 helps in normal tasks like windows start up, or just normal software (single threaded or dual threaded),,, where quads are recommended for video editing, image editing or workstations computers, etc. which extensively make use of multi threading...
so i highly suggest u to go with core 2 quad, coz that's what quad cores are good with- video editing, encoding, etc... all these tasks use multiple threads. go with Q6600 or Q9400 or Q9450 if u can spend more money...

Q9xxx are costlier, more powerful n require low energy..
Q6xxx are comparatively cheaper, comparatively less powerful n require more energy...