Quad/Duo Duo/Quad!!! Aaaauuuggghh!!

[aznguy0028]

+1 for the Q6600.

seriously, i have both a C2D and C2Q machine or had. E6600 and i used to have a Q6600 both at 3.0ghz. i OC-ed them both, and honestly, there is such a noticeable smoother windows experience on the Q6600. but then again, i sold the Q6600 to my friend cuz he needed a processor and got a Q9450.

i'm a hardcore gamer also, but i also want my computer to be used to other things, and not just gaming. overall the experience is much better with a
quad than a duo.

imo, why would a few more fps matter when such great cards are out like the 4850/4870? i play games like TF2, COD4, WIC, on my current 3870x2, and its always 60+. i play on 1440x900 because thats the max my monitor supports. i don't even think its noticeable anymore if you have a decent graphics card. i run COD4 at 100fps+ and would another 2 fps at the fps range matter? 😛

 

[stove]

I am very very happy with the Q9450 I picked up. Running the Q9450 at 2.66 stock speed I am getting between 90-200+ FPS in Age of Conan with Max Distance/High Settings/Max Shadows/Max Pixels/Max Foliage with an XFX 8800GT.

 

[The_Blood_Raven]

Any system is enough for your needs. FSB x cache memory won't make a difference in your experience.
As for the future, in 3 or 4 years all existing systems, including an extra-expensive QX9770+3xSLI 280GTX+blablabla will be very slow.
Believe, in 3 or 4 years from now, you'll be making questions about your new upgrade.
That said, just keep in mind that quad cores generate more heat than Core 2 Duos, so you better have some extra $80 to spend in an aftermarket cooler.

$80?! My Xigmatek 1283 only costs $28 and only a lapped TRUE can hang with my cooler!

Any who, get the Q6600 the difference between the Q6600 and the Q9300 is only noticeable in benchmarks, honestly there is a thing called diminishing returns.

To aznguy0028 no it wouldn't not at that resolution. At higher resolutions 1920x1200+ the difference would be more like 5-10 FPS, not to mention Crysis. I hate mentioning Crysis, honestly thats not the ONLY game out in the world, hell the game is not even that good and the story certainly sucks, but it is the only game that matters, right? RIGHT?! Oops, back to subject, for people like me who have a nice E6750 overclocked to atleast 3.2, I never see any difference after 3.2, then there is no reason to upgrade, until nehalem.

 

[Asian PingPong]

lameness more correctly put its a Q6600 at 3.75ghz(3.75ghz * 4ipc = 15) that is needed to match a Q9450 at 3ghz (3ghz * 5ipc = 15). Well more or less, there are other factors that can obviously add to or deduct from the performance.

If you doubt my argument about the IPC consider AMD is the one who pushed the ghz * IPC metric to prove their chips were faster at the time. Additionally think of the Phenom X4 at 2.4ghz with a IPC of 3 can not compete with the Q6600 at 2.4ghz (4 ipc).

Link plz. Every benchmark I have seen of the q9300 puts it roughly 5-10% ahead of the q6600. According to you it should be a massive 25% ahead (the extra clock speed compensates for the lower cache).

 

[Ogdin]

In games the difference wouldn't be noticeable anyways unless your running 1024 resolution and staring at a fps counter.For the light multi tasking your doing the quad would be asleep most of the time,but if you don't upgrade often it would buy you some future proofing for when(or should i say if)the multithreaded apps/games that you would use start to trickle in next year or the year after.

 

[Guest]

I am very very happy with the Q9450 I picked up. Running the Q9450 at 2.66 stock speed I am getting between 90-200+ FPS in Age of Conan with Max Distance/High Settings/Max Shadows/Max Pixels/Max Foliage with an XFX 8800GT.

except you're running at like 1024x768 lol

OP get a quad core and shutup.

 

[Oh Snap]

Get a quad. Seriously, what's the discussion? HELP ME LIVE MY LIFE AND MAKE OTHERWISE SIMPLE DECISIONS FOR ME.

 

[bjornlo]

Get the Quad. It is true most games and other apps are not optimized for 4 cores (yet). But, the difference in performance (framerates) between a very fast dualcore and an average Quadcore is trivial.

The limiting factor on games (the 93xx and 8000 series duals vs the older q6600 is not the CPU but the video card)

You can't future proof any PC purchase. No matter what you buy a year from now it will be lame and slow; but you will probably have greater utility from the quad a year from now than the dual.

Also, the q6600 is a famously good OC'er. (Q6600 @3ghz with no voltage change)

 

[kad]

I remember myself couple of month back
I was confused between Q6600, E8400, E8500
Q9xxx were not available
Finally I bought E8500
But GOD has his own ways
It was my birthday and guess what happened ?
I received Q6600 as bithday gift
I have it now sitting in my drawer waiting for multithreaded games
Wish you happy birthday

 

[The_Blood_Raven]

Sounds like GOD has a sick sense of humor kad....

 

[Grimmy]

Grogger Go.... buy the Q6600 or E8500 off Kad. [:kentuckyranger:3]

 

[Grogger Go]

Thanks everyone. I'll go the quad and see what I can afford on the video card front.

 

[bootysmaka]

I also went ahead today and ordered the q6600 with the new biostar Tpower I45 mobo, xigmatech s1283, and 4gb a-data vitesta cas4 ddr2 800 to go along with the Diamond Radeon HD 4870 already on the way. Can't wait!

Hopefully my 650 watt psu is up to the task when overclocking...

 

[zarksentinel]

go for quad core to make your system future proof and spend a little bit more for Q9450 ,12Mb of cache will help you a lot .

 

[Grogger Go]

Don't tempt me! I'm struggling as it is to justify spending on a new system!

I'm thinking the Q6600, and then do some studying on how to OC... if I'm brave enough.

 

[Grogger Go]

On the quad-duo issue, it seems to me given the huge number of threads on the issue that it's a unique "problem". In the past the issue was more straight forward and came down to intel over AMD etc, how much you could afford, and whether you were better off spending money on more RAM, better video card etc etc.

With the E8400 and Q6600 now basically the same price it seems to me the decision is a bit trickier, and make me think intel itself isn't really sure of which way the public wants to go. After so many years of focussing on Ghz it now seems to be having a bet each way.

Obviously in the future quad will be standard but until quads at the same speed as duos are the same price, I think we're going to be having the dilemma of GHz versus cores.

So I guess for those sick of the arguement, sorry I can't see it ending soon.

 

[Zoron]

I am very very happy with the Q9450 I picked up. Running the Q9450 at 2.66 stock speed I am getting between 90-200+ FPS in Age of Conan with Max Distance/High Settings/Max Shadows/Max Pixels/Max Foliage with an XFX 8800GT.

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa142/baldtornado/Archmagus_picture000.png

What resolution and what AA and AF settings are you using? My specs are somewhat similar... except that I'm using the Q6600 instead of the Q9450. I usually get an average FPS around 30 - 35... most of the time in high 30s low 40s and occasionally jumping up to 50+... but sometimes dipping as low as 24 FPS. I have VS enabled... which does limit me to 60 FPS... but your numbers indicate I should be hitting that almost constantly.

I am running at 1680 x 1050 with max AA and 8x AF... high settings with shadows off.

 

[shadowthor]

+1 for the Q9450 if you have the cash.

 

[Grogger Go]

Nah I don't have the cash, and I am getting more and more tempted to try OC. The more I read on the OC board the less worried I get that something I do will destroy my CPU. And the thought of having 4 cores @ 3.0Ghz for the Q6600 price make it a pretty sweet deal.

 

[amdfangirl]

^ Don't do that until you are sure its expendable ie. few years later...

 

[Grogger Go]

Not sustainable at OC?

 

[X3qtor]

Not sustainable at OC?

Don't put your bet on OC unless it's your 2nd cpu or you have 1 for backup.
I know everyone seems to have this good impression of q6600 being a good overclocker. Well if you google a bit for q6600 you'll find alot of ppl who killed their cpu/mobo trying to OC. I have to admit these days it's very hard to kill a cpu/mobo by oc'ing. The definite issue of any cpu is it's own ability to OC, since no cpu is the same with another. U might buy 2 x q6600 cpus and realise that under OC one can easily go 3.6/3.8 ghz while the other can't get past 3/3.2ghz. Each cpu is unique and may have better or worse oc'ing capabilities.
U have to 1st of all like that cpu ALOT without oc'ing it. Then you can enjoy yourself and add some satisfaction by trying to get it higher. Buying a cpu and thinking that you will like it @3.6ghz is only going to make things dissapointing in case it is a model that can't get past 3/3.2 ghz. I'm not saying 3 ghz for a quad is nothing, it actually rocks, but i'm only warning you as i did the same time a couple of times in the past and i ended up dissapointed about my aquisition. Even more when you're on a budget and can't afford to kill cpu's or any other pc parts trying to get the last drop of performance out of them. 3.6 ghz for q6600 is 50% over factory frequency. I know most say it's easy, well i say it's not, especially for budget reasons.

Q9450 will not bring ALOT of performance, but it will be a tiny better then q6600 in 2-3 years. It is a cooler and more power efficient quad then the q6600. You can easily get it to 3.2ghz and never worry of something going wrong with it EVER (ofc with an aftermarket HSF and some good thermal paste, AS5 is good)

Q6600 is definetly the winner price/performance and a better performer then the E8xxx models if you're an overall pc user, meaning that you don't play 24/7 and 2 FPS more or less doesn't make you touch yourself..., maybe sometimes you want to open some random programs while playing some light games and listen to music too.

E8400 is definetly the budget winner for any 24/7 gamer who will probably invest more money in a GPU solution then a q6600 user.

Beyond 3.2 ghz however the GPU will botleneck the CPU, so going for q9450 over the q6600/e8400 will not get you any extra fps in most common sense games. However it will be a safer bet for being a better all-around cpu in the next few years then the q6600/e8400.

So in my opinion, if you have some extra cash hidden somewhere in a piggy bank, get the q9450 together with a decent HSF (xigmatek/tuniq) and oc it to 3 or 3.2ghz ... and profit.
If you're on a very tight budget get the q6600 get a good HSF or even better a CPU only watercooling system that shouldn't cost more then ~100 $ and oc it to 3.6 if you're lucky to get a good cpu. Although if you put q6600+water cooling cpu unit you would reach the q9450 price and it's not so profitable anymore.
If you want to be extra cheap, and you plan to perhaps make an upgrade sometime next year, get the E8400 together with a decent HSF and oc it to 3.6/3.8 ghz

Hope it helped somehow

 

[Grogger Go]

Thanks X3qtor much to chew over.

Most likely this forum has gone to my head and after getting excited about having a decent CPU for the first time, I've started looking into areas (OCing) that I probably don't need to worry about for now.

Given the MOBO I'll be getting is the GA-EP35-DS3L and I read it's a bit tricky to OC I think it's best I just buy the damn CPU and stay at stock and enjoy.

 

[X3qtor]

Actually that mobo is pretty nice for oc, i'm just trying to make things sound easier for you and make you decide. Oh and most important, if you really want to decide, you definetly have to stay away from hardware forums till you buy one of those cpu's 😀 Otherwise you'll change your mind daily based on different replies and never get to buy something 😀

All in all trust me when i will say you'll be happy with whatever you buy. All 3 cpus are great values for today and they are all worth their money. Enjoy your build and if you can let us know some 1st impression or maybe a review of what you buy . I'd love to see some benchmarks or something 😀

 

[blacksci]

q6600 makes a great overclocker, 3.3 gigs stable on air with a artic pro 7, and all i did was increase the fsb. People who manage to kill this cpu are idiots, and should just sell all computer components they have, cuz there too stupid to own one.