Q6600 still good?

[worshipme]

The E8500 has a 9.5x multi compared to the E8400's 9x. It's not really a big advantage.

It's really luck of the draw with these chips, some are hitting 4GHz at stock volts, some are topping out at 3.6-3.8 (anything more than 1.4V on these and they will degrade fast. 1.4V absolute max). To limit the possibility of getting a dud (like me) of going with an E3110. It's identical in specs to the E8400, but Xeons are generally higher binned than their desktop counter parts, so you should get a better chip. Don't get your hopes up though.

 

[aowen416]

The E8500 has a 9.5x multi compared to the E8400's 9x. It's not really a big advantage.

It's really luck of the draw with these chips, some are hitting 4GHz at stock volts, some are topping out at 3.6-3.8 (anything more than 1.4V on these and they will degrade fast. 1.4V absolute max). To limit the possibility of getting a dud (like me) of going with an E3110. It's identical in specs to the E8400, but Xeons are generally higher binned than their desktop counter parts, so you should get a better chip. Don't get your hopes up though.

I'll risk it. If I can only get it to 3.6-3.8 it won't be tragic, it will still be damn fast (compared to my current 3800 X2). Can you recommend a good mobo for the E8500 that is good for OCing and does crossfire ? (You're so damn knowledgeable xD)

 

[worshipme]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117165&Tpk=E3110

The E3110 is $70 cheaper than the E8500 and there will be a bigger chance of getting a good chip.

 

[aowen416]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117165&Tpk=E3110

The E3110 is $70 cheaper than the E8500 and there will be a bigger chance of getting a good chip.

...and it's virtually the same in terms of performance :O?

 

[Kage]

The E if I'm not mistaken would be a dual core chip...correct?

So how the heck, even with a higher clock speed, can it beat a Quad when a programs optimised to run properly with cores?

If its not, then yeah, a higher clock speed would do better, but if a program is, then no, it wouldn't beat it at all I wouldn't think.

 

[worshipme]

So how the heck, even with a higher clock speed, can it beat a Quad when a programs optimised to run properly with cores?

I'm not sure if I do...this will be for games.

That is how.

 

[aowen416]

That is how.

Haha xD

When will games start becoming optimized for quad? I saw that Supreme Commander performed a lot better with a quad.

Now I'm sort of leaning towards the Q9450...a lot of people on Tom's Hardware said it'd be a great choice. But then there's the Q6600 which gives very similar performance for a lot less. Now I'm back where I started....ahh!

I'm going to be doing this:

Games on weekends
Rest of the time Work
Not Video Editing
SOME Photoshop, very little.

That's it. However, this PC needs to last a good 3 years or so without upgrading, so will quad be a good choice for the future?

Also, don't you think that the extra $150 for the Q9450 could be spent on say (if I went with the Q6600), faster RAM, or a WD Raptor, and give a more substancial performance increase than it would alone? Or should I just stick with the E8500?

 

[worshipme]

When will games start becoming optimized for quad? I saw that Supreme Commander performed a lot better with a quad.

It depends on what developers decide, and if as more and more are optimizing for consoles and just porting the game, I don't think it will happen soon. The Unreal engine 3 runs multiple threads, but if you look at benchmarks, there are still no advantages with the quad core.

And I really don't think the Q9450, for the extra cost, is worth it over the Q6600. It's limited in OC'ing capabilities by it's 8x multiplier, and with the Q6600 being so cheap, you can't really justify the extra cost.

But mate, it's swings and roundabouts, I can't give you a rock solid answer on what to buy. You'll have to look up the apps you run ATM, see how many threads they run, and what you'll be doing in the future, and make your decision.

 

[aowen416]

It depends on what developers decide, and if as more and more are optimizing for consoles and just porting the game, I don't think it will happen soon. The Unreal engine 3 runs multiple threads, but if you look at benchmarks, there are still no advantages with the quad core.

And I really don't think the Q9450, for the extra cost, is worth it over the Q6600. It's limited in OC'ing capabilities by it's 8x multiplier, and with the Q6600 being so cheap, you can't really justify the extra cost.

But mate, it's swings and roundabouts, I can't give you a rock solid answer on what to buy. You'll have to look up the apps you run ATM, see how many threads they run, and what you'll be doing in the future, and make your decision.

By the time a good number of games support quad core, the Q6600 will most likely be quite dated...I assume. Therefore, I think I'm going with the E8500 or the Xeon. Once a good amount of games support quad, I'll upgrade.

 

[esa193]

qaud core weather the q6600 or the 45nm version
its the same chip
there all the same chips just shrunken
qaud core at 3ghz u wont ever have a slow down