Q6600 over an E6600

[firky]

Hey guys just wanted to no what you thought.

 

 

the intel Q6600's with 8mB cache can this chip perfom better than an a E6600 with 4mb Cache running windows XP. im not realy fussed about the fact one hase 4 cores and the other has 2! becuse windows can only just about use 2 cores let alone 4!

 

 

any ways what do you guys think?

[cchalogamer]

Well if you go read the reviews, maybe even the OCC one...and then look at the OCabilty of the CPUs (E6600 over 3.2 is VERY easy, Q....not so easy all the time) The Quad needs better cooling than the duo so in all honesty the chances you need the quad or would see ANY performance increase are VERY small.

[upok]

Well, according to almost all of the reviews and benches, the quads kick the c2d's butt. Just google it, there are plenty of comparisons out there. My e6400 is crushingly fast--it really does beat up my old X2 4200. I get better performance from my 6400 at stock than I could get from my 4200 overclocked to 2.7. And once I oc'd my c2d at all, it just left my x2 in the dust.

 

As far as window's ability to use the 4 cores, the way I understand it, the Kentsfields are two core2 processors on one die. Windows treats them like 2 pairs, thus tricking windows into thinking that it is essentially a dual core processor, not a quad(although all 4 cores are being used). So what windows sees is (c2d#1+c2d#2) rather than (core#1+core#2+core#3+core#4).

 

Did any of that makes sense? It made sense in my head, but when I read it now, it hurts!

 

And I agree with cc, the quads are cool and everything, but I can't justify the price difference over the c2d. Right now, in the cost/performance category the 6600 is the one to beat. If money doesn't matter, then just go big and liquid cool it!

Edited March 14, 2007 by upok

[firky]

yeah that make sence!! but i wonder seeing as windows doesnt no there are 4 cores how would it use them lol!!

 

 

thanks for that cchalogamer didnt even no there was a review *reads*

[Silverfox]

it's a good review. ask yourself what your ultimate needs are and you probably won't need the Q6600

[Verran]

it's a good review. ask yourself what your ultimate needs are and you probably won't need the Q6600

That's a good way to put it. A lot of people assume the quad is the best because it's the most expensive, but many reviews (including the one written on OCC) show that the quad actually performs worse in gaming when comparred to the E6600.

 

The quad is a great chip for SMP apps that are very cpu intensive. If you use these kinds of apps a lot, then the quad will pull its weight. If you don't, the quad is actually just a much more expensive chip with less performance.

[firky]

i only realy use my rig for gameing,photoshop,msn,convert audio files and burn/rip the odd dvd so ill stick with my E6600 just had a thought that 8mb cashe might speed things up a little!

[Silverfox]

it might be a shade quicker, but don't bother wasting the funds. i'd rather spend it on better ram or something like that. or even an 8800...

 

edit: it's also nice to see more american users (EU had them for a while already) branching out to the Hiper PSUs at last - i noticed yours there firky, even though i know you are French

[traderonline]

i heard that windows vista can utilize all 4 cores and get the maximum out of your cpu. anyway.. quadro is much better than E6600

[Silverfox]

i heard that windows vista can utilize all 4 cores and get the maximum out of your cpu. anyway.. quadro is much better than E6600

 

did you read the review on OCC? by your above comment i guess not. the review suggests otherwise for the general use that were outlined in firky's requirements.

[firky]

yeah better ram might be the key! i kinda screwed up when i got my ram! i went for ram to go with the AM2 rig i was going to buy but then got told C2D was a zillion times better and forgot to pick something faster!!

 

This is my second Hiper psu there gr8 had a 580watt modeler one but i went for 670watt for that Little extra head room while clocking!!

 

I'm happy with my 7900s Ive had 1900mhz on the mem clock but got a little hot after my pencil mod! and i have problems with my 2d clock while at higher volts never relay found an answer! Ive also had 720mhz on the core but CSS didn't relay like that much had to back down! and went for a safe 660/1600 ( ive not seen much air cooling for a 7900GTO and im not willing to go to water just yet so it might have to wait)

[Silverfox]

if you can get higher rated ram than PC6400, then you have some more overclocking headroom. your cooling solution already looks decent too, but I'm glad you are on the same wavelength regarding the money saved by opting out from the Q6600

 

(i have the Hiper 580W Modular, but then my system is pretty low-key!)