Crap! Q6600 for $199

[crosshares]

Now I've got yet another decision to make, get a quad core, or stick with the E8400?


PS:

 

[dagger]

Now I've got yet another decision to make, get a quad core, or stick with the E8400?


PS:

Get quad. And it was $189.99 on newegg around 2 weeks ago. They put the price back up because it got more popular meanwhile.

 

[crosshares]

Hell you should see the E8400, the price keeps jumping around every week!

Yeah, I think I'll go for the Quad, how do I make sure I get the one with G0 stepping though?

 

[dagger]

Hell you should see the E8400, the price keeps jumping around every week!

Yeah, I think I'll go for the Quad, how do I make sure I get the one with G0 stepping though?

Although you can't know for sure, it's almost impossible to find new b3 now. Those things are out of production. As fast as newegg's stocks get cleared, it should be all g0.

 

[crosshares]

1 thing though, how much of a performance hit are we talking by going for Q6600 over E8400? Because now that I can get a quad for crazy cheap, I though, why not? I'll take a small performance hit.

 

[BlackKnight7891]

atm its performance is based on application games run better on faster dual core compilers and rendering works better on quad nothing wrong with a E8400 if your gaming in fact i would stick with it for now

 

[shadowthor]

I would go with the quad seeing it at that price, plus you can overclock it to match the E8400 clock speed so, it won't be much of a performance hit.

 

[BlackKnight7891]

as far as Upgrade goes A Q6600 G0 is behind the E8400 so you would be looking at spending money on a Q9300

 

[outlw6669]

1 thing though, how much of a performance hit are we talking by going for Q6600 over E8400? Because now that I can get a quad for crazy cheap, I though, why not? I'll take a small performance hit.

None as soon as you bump the FSB to 333Mhz.
The Q6600 will easily run at the same 3.0Ghz as the E8400, at stock voltages even.

 

[pcgamer12]

Q6600 FTW! Get it over the E8400.

 

[outlw6669]

Q6600 FTW! Get it over the E8400.

Now I know it...
You are just following me around, aren't you

 

[cjl]

The E8400 will OC quite well too, and I wouldn't at all be surprised to see 3.6+ out of it, but for general use and upcoming games, it still wouldn't match a Q6600 in most cases. Older games will run faster on the E8400, but older games will also tend to run fast enough on either, and the ones that run slow enough to actually notice a difference tend to prefer the quad.

 

[pcgamer12]

Yup! That's me, a follower, not a leader. Personally, a quad core even clocked slower makes more sense to me.

Logic: You can add speed, but not cores. Overclocking adds speed, but what adds cores? THAT IS ZEH QUESTIOWN.

 

[Preclude]

Have your games run on cores 2 and 3, have everything else on cores 0 and 1.

Also, with a little extra spent on cooling you can get that bad boy to 3.4 and beyond.

Also, don't listen tho those vid losers when overclocking. If you have a good quality PSU, and motherboard with very stable power you can give a Q6600 up to ~1.5v. Just make sure you have the cooling and the system.

 

[SuicideSilence]

Ill take your e8400 from you ....

really lol ill buy it.

 

[pcgamer12]

I wish I bought a quad, that with AC Freezer 7 Pro, OC to 3.2 Ghz.

 

[VoRogue]

One thing that people seem to forget is that for single threaded applications ..... databases etc, an overclocked E3110/E8400 is going to kill a Q6600 everytime and for anyone who uses a computer for intensive tasks other than Video Editing an 8400 @ 4 Ghz is going to be 33 % faster than a Q6600 @ 3 Ghz.

 

[Major_Trouble]

One thing that people seem to forget is that for single applications .......gaming etc, an overclocked E3110/E8400 is going to kill a Q6600 everytime but when you throw in virus scanner/firewall, spyware detector, download manager running and burning a DVD all at the same time they make your game glitch annoyingly.