suedenim Posted January 22, 2008 Posted January 22, 2008 I'm not even at 3G yet and don't feel disadvantaged as to 2 cores or four? Right now the difference is too small given my needs (web, gaming) http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=499&pgno=0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branjo Posted January 22, 2008 Posted January 22, 2008 You know I'll have to agree with you. This last couple of days I have been OCing a little, its stable at 3.2 but I thought to myself whats the point anyway. I just wanted to see if I could and well I can. So im back at 2.4 and the system feels no different, I guess OCing isn't all that important to me and im liking the temp drop too. Until they make a true multi core app or game the Q6600 is no better than an E6600 and when they do, then my chip should come into its own. I think im just gonna focus on OCing the GPU for now. Its still nice to know I can throw another Ghz at the CPU but at the end of the day its not needed in the slightest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
suedenim Posted January 23, 2008 Posted January 23, 2008 I might feel different when I get round to playing Crysis but I think I'll need the HD3870 X2 for that before I have to push the CPU hard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branjo Posted January 23, 2008 Posted January 23, 2008 Yeah Crysis is a bad game to test a new rig on as it makes your new rig seem like the one you just got rid of..lol. Good game but after I completed it I haven't played it since. Worth 50 bucks? in a word ...no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
suedenim Posted January 23, 2008 Posted January 23, 2008 I know the feeling! When I first bought FEAR I gave up after 20 mins until I bought a better GPU (well a new rig to be honest) and my 20" LCD. Would I get a Quad if I was building a new rig right now - probably if the price was right and it seemed to have good OCing potential. I'd also check the CPU's supported by your Mobo. I was suckered by Intel saying they were sticking to socket 775. All I've got left with my mobo is getting a Q6x00. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mknwatt Posted January 23, 2008 Posted January 23, 2008 Man, the e8300/e8400/e8500 look like they may be the way to go for me.Anyone know the latest availability date? See your trying out Intel. I would go for the dual core instead of a quad, the E8500 would be fun but maybe settle for a E8400 because of $$$. Newegg has the E8400 Wolfdale 3.0GHz 6MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor $224.99 Don't have the E8500 in stock yet. Haven't tried the newer bios, 9/13 has work great on the E6850. I thought the newer bios were for the yorkfield and wolfdale cores......as I look the 12/24 has a few new options, could befit all of us. The Intel switch should be a pleasent experience! I was amazed how easy the P35-T2R OCed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReaper Posted March 28, 2008 Posted March 28, 2008 how good is the q6600 compared to the e6600 really? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 I have an E6600 and have yet to have a situation where I need more processing power. Quad cores are good if you work for NASA or something but for everyday joe's like us, it's a waste of money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemidare Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 I am very happy with my quad core. I just like to be able to encode a game video watch a movie and surf the internet and not worry about the processor being able to keep up. (shrug) Just my opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branjo Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Yeah same here, before If I started doing something intensive on the computer then I had to wait for it to finish, encoding music, movie or anything really. Now it doesn't matter when you start or what you start you have all the processing power to take the load. If you are just a gamer plain and simple then you will see no benefit with a quad yet. but as an E6600 right now on newegg is $230 and a Q6600 is $250 I don't see the sense in going with the E6600, which is still a freaking awesome CPU don't get me wrong, I just think 4 cores will prove to be more useful than 2 in the not so distant future. and for $20 extra you can't possible say its not a bargain lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReaper Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 That was my thinking too, I could've got a q6600 last night for $150 second hand but tested... But few people have told me horror stories about quads, I think they just don't get the benefit from games yet as you say, however I mostly do digital video and 3d studio work so I am considering the q6600. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemidare Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Well i went from a dual core opteron running @ 2.8ghz and now i am running the q6600 in my sig and i noticed a difference in games like Bioshock and GOW. Especially when you record video using fraps. No slow down at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now