Why are they still making dual-cores? Really everyone? Maybe because, like Intel, who still makes single core solutions for lower end systems in some markets, AMD will continue to offer cheaper CPU solutions. Not everyone is a fanatic and wants to run a server, or the latest FPS in maxed out settings. That's great if YOU want to install quad-core computers in your household, but first off you'd be surprised that you probably aren't even utilizing them to their full extent, and second off, not everyone does need even dual-core CPUs still.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/misc/picture/?src=/images/cpu/phenom-athlon-ii-x2/oc-550.png&1=1

http://www.xbitlabs.com/misc/picture/?src=/images/cpu/phenom-athlon-ii-x2/oc-250.png&1=1

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-athlon-ii-x2.html

Thats why theyre making dual cores.

@ Yazovets

You are absolutely right!

Why would I spend less than $100 on a dual core processor for my Mum's internet/email box, when I can spend $250 on a quad core?

I also have a low power internet/email/office tasks box that I use instead of my power guzzling gaming system for office work. When building it, I thought about using a 45w dual core and integrated graphics, but ended up going with a 120w quad core and dual HD4870x2 in Crossfire instead.

Boy, am I glad I did! OpenOffice is so quick, and Firefox has never been snappier!

Yields and binning and power consumption you knobs!

Why not a new north bridge instead?

It's great that AMD is offering new 3 and 4 core CPUs all based on the 45nm process. However, why bother still making new dual core CPUs? What is their purpose?

These days everyone seems to be getting quad cores except people buying laptops. I've been putting in quad cores left and right in my household machines.

Heck, I even have 2 HTPC builds both using Phenom X4 CPUs.

What good is a high-GHz dual core when a slower quad core CPU can do more math per second?