P4 2.6C vs. Core 2 Duo Q6600

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
K

kenratboy

Distinguished
Feb 13, 2007
160
0
18,680
First, yes, this is totally crazy and stupid, but bear with me.

I might be able to get a killer deal on this CPU and (matching) motherboard - and obviously with it, I would get new ram (2 GB) and video card (and all that...)

Obviously, this would be stupidly faster that my 2.6C - but how much so (in general terms if you could compare the CPU performance raw)?

According to Newegg, I ordered that CPU in December 2003, so it is 3.5 years old...and Crysis is coming out soon 😛 - so I know its time.
 
Well, the Q6600 is a 2.4ghz processor. On average, a 2.4ghz Conroe is equivalent to a 4.8 Netburst.

So to equal in performance to the Q6600, you would need seven of the P4 chips.

Disclaimer: This is not definitive.
 
LOL, I like how that sounds.

And that doesn't even cover the fact everything is running, what 4X faster or more (memory and all that stuff)?
 
Pentium 4 2.6GHz
howtobepoor_geo_010.jpg


Core 2 Q6600
10777-2007-Lamborghini-Murcielago.jpg
 
First, yes, this is totally crazy and stupid, but bear with me.

I might be able to get a killer deal on this CPU and (matching) motherboard - and obviously with it, I would get new ram (2 GB) and video card (and all that...)

Obviously, this would be stupidly faster that my 2.6C - but how much so (in general terms if you could compare the CPU performance raw)?

According to Newegg, I ordered that CPU in December 2003, so it is 3.5 years old...and Crysis is coming out soon 😛 - so I know its time.
Click to expand...

A 2.6 user who swears the 2.4 q6600 won't touch it.

http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/8859/iraqimoronhp4.jpg
 
well, i can't really say, you see, to give you an idea of performance increase it would be mostly understandable to give you a multiple or a ratio, but since the 2.6=0 in the ratio or as a multiple it would be impossible, or it would mean the q6600 is infinitely better... ok, so it is... but that is beside the point.
 
well, i can't really say, you see, to give you an idea of performance increase it would be mostly understandable to give you a multiple or a ratio, but since the 2.6=0 in the ratio or as a multiple it would be impossible, or it would mean the q6600 is infinitely better... ok, so it is... but that is beside the point.
Click to expand...

A Q6600 is about to be had for under $300. I have one. It will be hard to resist building with a 45nm Penryn when it comes out later this year. OP is thinking quadcore jumping from his single core. Asking if there is really that big of a difference is like asking if a bear sh!ts in the woods. My correlation is not far off. No where near to the efingftard in the picture.
 
Well, the Q6600 is a 2.4ghz processor. On average, a 2.4ghz Conroe is equivalent to a 4.8 Netburst.

So to equal in performance to the Q6600, you would need seven of the P4 chips.

Disclaimer: This is not definitive.
Click to expand...

The 2.6C has HT (Hyper-Threading) so it's more 5 - 6 P4 2.6Cs. :lol: 😉 in multithreaded apps.
 
The 2.6C has HT (Hyper-Threading) so it's more 5 - 6 P4 2.6Cs. Laughing Wink in multithreaded apps.
Click to expand...

I hope that was sarcastic 8O

Nope, not sarcastic at all. Before dual core the only multithreading (albeit limited) possible on a consumer CPU was the P4s with HTs.

My old machine was a 2.6C @ 3.3GHz, so I have 3 years of real world experience on it. It was a solid CPU, a bit dated now obviously but it handled multitasking much better than my other machine with an XP-M @ 2.6GHz, even though the XP-M probably edges it in single threaded performance.

Compare video encoding times with HT on/off and you won't think I'm being sarcastic.
 
It is amazing how fast my computer is for having a 4 year old CPU/MB/RAM (I do have a 6600GT in it) - but new games just don't run with the same enthusuasm as 4 year old ones :?

Basically, I am going to hold off until my computer is no longer usable for the most part, then upgrade, but if I can get a good deal on this CPU and MB, I might have to just go for it.
 
The 2.6C has HT (Hyper-Threading) so it's more 5 - 6 P4 2.6Cs. Laughing Wink in multithreaded apps.
Click to expand...

I hope that was sarcastic 8O

Nope, not sarcastic at all. Before dual core the only multithreading (albeit limited) possible on a consumer CPU was the P4s with HTs.

My old machine was a 2.6C @ 3.3GHz, so I have 3 years of real world experience on it. It was a solid CPU, a bit dated now obviously but it handled multitasking much better than my other machine with an XP-M @ 2.6GHz, even though the XP-M probably edges it in single threaded performance.

Compare video encoding times with HT on/off and you won't think I'm being sarcastic.

Ahhh the Pentium4C Northwood with HT Technology. Probably one of my favorite CPU's ever.

I ran, much like you, both a P4C 3.0@4GHz and an AMD AthlonXP 3200+ @ 2.8GHz and must say that I preffered using the Pentium4 machine. It was much more responsive in a windows environment and although both were somewhat on equal terms in games I still preffered the Multithreaded capabilities of the P4C.

Now looking back and trying to compare my P4C with even an Atglon64 X2 4800+ @ 3GHz wasn't doable. The A64X2 was much more responsive. And now we have Core 2 Quads which adds even more to performance.

I simply cannot put into words the difference this upgrade will do for your system's responsivness.
 
Although THG doesn't have the Northwoods on the chart, you can get an idea from the comparison to a 2.8 Prescott.
695463171wl9.png

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=695&model2=463&chart=171

One note, however - unless your current system has < 1GB RAM or your current vidcard really sucks - or you do a lot of CPU intensive things such as encoding - don't expect to see a huge difference in everday use. Most software is still designed for a single core. You won't see much difference in browsing the net, playing older games, etc. This seems like common sense, but it seems that some upgraders are expecting everything to be noticably faster, and are dissapointed that their new system doesn't "feel" faster than their old one.

My first Core2 upgrade was from a 3.2 P4 (Northwood) to a E6600 (OC to 2.9). I can honestly say that it didn't feel any faster (Windows open at the same speed, Office Apps run the same, etc) - but when doing encoding I really noticed the difference (1hr 47 min vs 22 min).

Also, you didn't say what price you were going to pay or what vid card your looking at. It may behoove you to wait for Intel's price cut (July 22), or if your primary interest is in gaming, you may be better off going dualcore and buying a better vidcard.
 
My first Core2 upgrade was from a 3.2 P4 (Northwood) to a E6600 (OC to 2.9). I can honestly say that it didn't feel any faster (Windows open at the same speed, Office Apps run the same, etc) - but when doing encoding I really noticed the difference (1hr 47 min vs 22 min).
Click to expand...

I noticed a huge difference in everything I use my computer for when I upgraded from the e6600 I had been using for more than six months to the Q6600 I am using now. The e6600 compared to the q6600 in the PC Mark 05 you quoted doesn't begin to exemplify the hands on boost in performance experience. Much less a Northwood 2.6. I repaired a 2.6 Northwood for someone a couple of months ago. It was like pulling teeth waiting for the machine to process compared to my dual/quad core machines. And I ADDED a half gig of RAM while repairing it! I have a 3.0 socket 478 Prescott and a 3.0 socket 775 P4 running around my offices currently. I took the 3.0 Prescott down and have it in my closet. 1:47 to :22 is humorous when I read it.
 
Do you see a difference in the everyday feel of your computer (window opening speed, etc.)? This seems to be where a lot of upgraders are expecting to see magic results.

As far as use goes, anything that took a minute or two on the P4 is now instantaneous - with some small compilings, I can't even get a sip of coffee in. 🙁
 
Comparing the e6600 to the Q6600, I do experience distinct quicker OS loading times loading with Windows XP pro off the 74GB SATA Raptor. Strangely, 150 GB SATA Raptor with Vista is a slow loader period. Of couse there is no comparison if you are talking my 3.0 pentium 4's single cores. The Q6600 is 'the ultimate driving machine'. The only single core processor I have that really puts out with full load 100% processor use (a frequently occuring single core CPU attribute) is my AMD 64 FX55 socket 939 at 2.8+. I am a novice overclocker and I think you will find what I am about to say unbelievable. I tweaked and overclocked my e6600 for months. I installed my q6600 about five weeks or so ago. I can't beieve I am saying this. I have NEVER overclocked it! I droped it in, fired it up and just simply smiled!!!!! I am not kidding! I'm still smiling! The system is so great and fun. I open my task manger and watch the CPU usage levels sometimes for kicks. Listen to this. I have not changed the BIOS setting to allow the CPU to run at 2.4 x 4 when not under load! hahahaha! LMAO! This system is really fun. What can I say.

Q6600
ASUS P5B-Deluxe
G. Skill PC6400 4GB 4-4-4-12
EVGA 7900GTO 512 MB
WD 150 SATA RAPTOR Vista HP 32
WD 74 SATA RAPTOR Windows XP PRO
WD 250 SATA storage
ASUS DVD-ROM
ASUS DVD-RW Lightscribe
Thermaltake 700 watt quad 12v rail PSU
Thermaltake Mozart tower
Thermaltake media Lab Led Remote control
Zalman 9500 Led HSF
Audigy 2 Soundblaster
Boston Acoustics
Pinnacle Studio 9 PCI
Slingbox Pro Digital Satellite
BenQ 22" LCD

Vista Experience rating is 5.9.
 
I have used pcpitstop.com system analysis for many years. If I remember correctly, my Pentium 4 3.0's score around 2000 on the comprehensive system analysis test score. I was delighted when my e6600 scored 3200 (I think 3200 was the score) I ran my Q6600 last week over ther and scored 5100. Jaw dropped.
 
Now you got me craving one. :x

I was going to wait and do another build with a Penryn (Provided AMD's destop quadcore doesn't outperform it), but I don't think I'll be able to pass up getting a Q6600 when the price drops in 6 weeks. :twisted:
 
Definately buy one at under $275.00. I am still kicking myself for paying $899.00 for the AMD 4800 X2 when it came out. I watched the price for months and it just would not drop. I plan to never pay like that again. Then there is Penryn! 😀
 
I'd like to think that upgrading to a Q6600 would let me skip Penryn, and wait for Nehalem - but I know myself better than that. :cry:


*Prepares credit card for maximum usage.*
 
This is all getting too expensive for my tastes. Upgrading to latest and greatest is always uber expensive. I want to say I learned my lesson. However, I am pleased with this Q6600. New chipsets and DD3 will become hard to resist. I'll be biting down hard to resist before it's over.
 
:lol: I know what you mean.

Unfortunately, I'm spending more since everything is so comparatively cheap. Just a few years ago, top of the line would cost $3,000 - a price that normally set me back. Now, it cost $1,000 and I'll upgrade 3 times without thinking about it - then wonder where all my money went. :?

Oh well, as long as the money doesn't come from the sacred purse & shoes budget - I'm safe. 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom