standard i3-4130 vs q6600@8x400 + ddr3@1600

[kaneelschep]

Hi all.

I understand this is the 100th thread about this comparison. I am sorry for that.
But I just could not find a clear answer wich describes the overclock of q6600 compared to mine.

So I have an asus p5e pro with q6600 and 4gb ddr3.
cpu at 8x400=3.2ghz and memory at 1600mhz. 700w coolermaster with 680gtx and evo 840 ssd.
Completely stable, been using it for years now. Never gets hot or whatever.
Running fc4 and compared games perfectly.

Now I just bought a simple standard i3-4130 system for the ssd in it. Basicly just wanted to keep the ssd and sell on the pc.
But now I read everywhere it is supposed to be faster than the q6600.
Doesnt feel that way..
Edit. I forgot to say the i3 has msi b85-g41 motherboard with 8gb ddr3 1333 mem and 840evo samsung ssd.

So is that really true compared to my specs?
Isnt it all just about fsb cpu and mem speeds?

Thanks!

 

[synphul]

Speeds can't be compared from one cpu generation to another. That's due to ipc or instructions per clock, basically raw performance. A cpu which is capable of say processing 100 instructions per hz is faster than one which can only process 60 instructions per hz. It doesn't matter if it's megahertz or gigahertz, those are just exponential of the base frequency. A more modern 3ghz cpu will be faster than an outdated 3ghz cpu.

Depending on the task you may or may not notice the speed. It doesn't take much processing power to open a browser window, it may not 'feel' any faster on an i7 7700k than it does on a core 2 duo (all other parts being as equal as possible). Start converting a video from one format to another and the 'feel' will be much different. In the same way a ferrari doesn't feel any faster than a honda in the parking lot. Put them on a racetrack where they can be fully utilized.

Here's a brief comparison of the q6600 vs the i3 4130T which is a low power and slightly slower version of the 4130. Even then the single threaded performance is more than double that of the q6600. The i3 is a hyper threaded dual core and the q6600 is a quad core, double the actual cores so maybe it's faster in situations that use all 4 cores? Nope. Multithreaded tests show the i3 still outperforms it.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/53?vs=1367

 

[The Paladin]

synphul covered it, here is another comparison between the two and the I3 is faster http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core2-Quad-Q6600-vs-Intel-Core-i3-4130

 

[herrwizo]

I can confirm that from practice. I had a Q9550 oc'ed to 3.4GHz (which is certainly faster than Q6600) and it got absolutely dominated by an i3 4130 in virtually all scenarios. Q6600 is still no slouch, but 10 years of progress did the trick. Time to upgrade

 

[kaneelschep]

Good read! Thanks a lot!

It makes it quite clear. Time has just overtaken my trusty Q6600.
I did some pcmarking and other benching in the meantime myself. The i3 is definetely faster. But not so much that I will immediately swap out my boards.
This was bought to sell though, so I will still do that.
My setup still does everything I need for now, so when I update, it will be with something that has a lot more power than now.
And has some good overclocking possibilities for later.

Thanks a lot!