Tom's 2007 CPU Charts

[pschmid]

We Compare 91 AMD and Intel processors, including Intel's brand new Core 2 FSB1333 CPUs, under Windows Vista and across 37 individual benchmarks.

http://stage.tomshardware.com/2007/07/16/cpu_charts_2007/

 

[ausch30]

Good article, it took a long time to read. It's nice to see that AMD (with the 6000+ at least) still has fairly a competitive product. It clearly shows that quads are the future and as more programs take advantage of them the will leave dual cores in the dust, anyone who was wondering Q6600 or E6850 just needs to read that. Good job.

 

[LaMpiR]

Will you be adding them to
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html ?

 

[deerhunter716]

Exactly right there AUsch30 -- just get a Q6600 and OC it to 3.0 GHz and you got all you need for a damn long time. No need to spend the $$$ on the Q6700 or QX6800. Especially with more and more games headed for multi-core use just look at the Supreme Commander benches - the quads RULE!!!

 

[zenze589]

Well I don't know if you noticed but the E6850 scored better than the Q6600 at supreme commander, which is supposed to be a game that utilizes multiple cores, as well as nearly all of the other games tested.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the E6850 also has greater overclocking potential than the Q6600, which would also make it more appealing.

I bring this up because I am about to build myself a new computer because I am currently running a agonizingly slow Athlon XP 2000+. And one of the things that I have been researching heavily is the choice between the E6850 and Q6600. Based on what I have been reading on these forums over the past week I was fairly sure I was going to go with the Q6600, but after looking at those benchmarks I'm having doubts...

 

[Ertman]

And like you zenze I have been reading a LONG time. I got bit by the 939 not being upgradeable to dual. I like AMD, but have never built an Intel system.

Am I reading the article right that a currently available AM2 6000+ running on a Nvidia 680I chipset WILL work on that socket with a future AMD Quad due out in next 6 months? So that the only thing I have to change would be a bios flash and the new quad dropped in to the existing MB, etc.

 

[Spanki]

For the next year or three, a Duo core cpu will let you overclock higher, cost less, with less investment in cooling and run your apps faster than a Quad will. For 90% of the buying public.

On the other hand, if you do 3D rendering / modelling, a lot of video encoding, a lot of folding, live for running benchmarks or just want some game to run faster (of the small handfull that will take full advantage of 4 cores), then a Quad makes sense.

 

[Aono]

Trouble is E6850 and Q6600 are the same price.

The way I see at the moment is this when choosing between them:

1. Are you a gamer?
If yes then go to 2.
If no then get a Q6600.

2. Will you be mostly playing current gen and last gen games or next gen games?
If Current + Last gen get a E6850 (5-15% better than Q6600 in this area)*
If Next gen get a Q6600 (Up to 80% better than a E6850 in this area)*

*Percentages very rough guestimates based on the benches I have seen so far... there will always be exceptions though.

 

[Ertman]

In relation to my, (Ertman's) post above.
I game a lot, widescreen monitor, will obtain with new build 8800 GTX or better to go with it.

I run BF2, 2142 now maxed out and do okay. STALKER is another story. My point is I like AMD, just trying to figure out if the AMD quads will run with the setup I mention above.

 

[Spanki]

Trouble is E6850 and Q6600 are the same price.

...not really true if you consider overclocking and cooling. To overclock them to the same speed (which you won't be able to do - the Duo with it's new G0 stepping will clock much better than the older stepping Quad), would require a more expensive cooling solution on the Quad, making it more expensive, overall.

The way I see at the moment is this when choosing between them:

1. Are you a gamer?
If yes then go to 2.
If no then get a Q6600.

2. Will you be mostly playing current gen and last gen games or next gen games?
If Current + Last gen get a E6850 (5-15% better than Q6600 in this area)*
If Next gen get a Q6600 (Up to 80% better than a E6850 in this area)*

*Percentages very rough guestimates based on the benches I have seen so far... there will always be exceptions though.

I guess I see it a bit differently than listed above, for a few reasons...

- if you have a few apps (be it games, 3D rendering, media encoding, folding, whatever) that you use often and can already take advantage of multiple cores and you don't mind your system running hotter/slower for everything else - then get a Quad.

- Otherwise, the newer stepping Duos are more than capable for most users needs for the next few years, will overclock higher, run cooler and cost less at the same time.

- 80% better?? That's either highly specific to some game where it won't mean an 80% better playing experiance to start with or just highly unrealistic. Game developers will start migrating to running more threads where it makes sense, but they can't start writing games that require a Quad to run. Either way, this migration will take time. I'd consider "80% better" to be the exception, not the rule . But hey, check back with me 3-4 years from now and I might agree.

...I expect the picture to change with favor swinging more towards Quads, a little bit once they get a newer stepping and again once the move to 45nm is made (lower power consumption, less heat), so if you think you could utilize a quad, it might still be better to wait if you're not in any hurry.

 

[zenmaster]

I would just like to point out that the Q6600 is supposed to start getting the G0 stepping as well according to something I read someplace :>>>

I'm hoping it does because it will be on my shortlist when that happens.

Until then, the G0 stepping is really the way to go.
Most of the review sites have not fully given it complete credit yet.

I've seen some posts with people getting 3.6Ghz on 1.30v and close to 4.0Ghz under 1.4v. (That is just CRAZY!)

...not really true if you consider overclocking and cooling. To overclock them to the same speed (which you won't be able to do - the Duo with it's new G0 stepping will clock much better than the older stepping Quad), would require a more expensive cooling solution on the Quad, making it more expensive, overall.

 

[Ditas]

So, theoretically; crysis will run better on the E6850? since supreme commander also uses 4 cores; why does it run faster on the Duo?

or am i just getting all crosseyed?

 

[Aono]

I said "Up to 80% better", what I mean by that is gains right now non-existent or slightly worse. But over the next few months the gain will be very small, maybe 0-5%. Next 12 months 5-15% better. 2 years time, 15-50% better and it will continue to grow. I don't it's unrealistic to think that by the end of their life the Q6600 will be out performing the E6850 by a large margin.

I'm also only talking about stock speeds so you may be right about over clocking potential, I don't know. I%u2019ve seen people argue it both ways. Some say the E6850 over clocks more; while others say that although the Q6600 doesn%u2019t over clock as much, BUT any gain you do make is worth more performance Mhz for Mhz when compared to E6850. EG A +600Mhz increase on a Q6600 improves performance more than +600Mhz would on the E6850.

But this is the future we're talking about so who knows?

 

[ausch30]

From what I saw in the charts the Q6600 was slightly slower in most benches than the E6850 and the benches in which it was faster it beat the pants off it. If you plan on getting a 45nm quad when they come out I would say go for the E6850 but if you plan on keeping the CPU for a few years the quad would be the better choice.

 

[bballsk8er333]

But this is the future we're talking about so who knows?

Ohhh, i know someone who knows....my good ol' friend, God

 

[Spanki]

I would just like to point out that the Q6600 is supposed to start getting the G0 stepping as well according to something I read someplace :>>>

I'm hoping it does because it will be on my shortlist when that happens.

Until then, the G0 stepping is really the way to go.
Most of the review sites have not fully given it complete credit yet.

I've seen some posts with people getting 3.6Ghz on 1.30v and close to 4.0Ghz under 1.4v. (That is just CRAZY!)

Yeah, I thought I read that the Q6600 was getting the G0 stepping as well, but I don't remember where now. Personally, I do 3D rendering/modelling for a living and do folding as well, so my next cpu upgrade will be a Quad, but I'm more interested in what the situation will look like with the Oct. (or even Feb. 08) price-cuts than the July 22nd ones. Hopefully by then the quads will be on the new stepping and we should have a better picture of what the Intel 45nm chips and AMD offerings look like.

 

[fx51]

MMM……

I notice the absent of the AMD FX -7x models.

 

[MarriedwMortgage]

Here are a couple links that provide a bit more information on next weeks prices.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3038

htt p://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=8065

Enjoy

 

[warezme]

I said "Up to 80% better", what I mean by that is gains right now non-existent or slightly worse. But over the next few months the gain will be very small, maybe 0-5%. Next 12 months 5-15% better. 2 years time, 15-50% better and it will continue to grow. I don't it's unrealistic to think that by the end of their life the Q6600 will be out performing the E6850 by a large margin.

But this is the future we're talking about so who knows?

15-50% in 2 years???? man, by then quad cores will probably be argued as being as crusty as father time and folks will be raving about 8 cores and higher as the must have item. I won't even comment on that 80% number!!

The only thing we need to worry about is that with prices falling having 4 cores over 2 will become, or is, essentially, FREE. Whether we see any benefits now, in 2 months or two years is irrelevant. We don't know. Lets just stick to that shall we.

 

[Aono]

15-50% in 2 years???? man, by then quad cores will probably be argued as being as crusty as father time and folks will be raving about 8 cores and higher as the must have item.

Of course... but what's that got to do with how well the Q6600 will perform relative to the E6850?

 

[deerhunter716]

The 6850 is also at 3.0 GHz; just grab the 6600 and OC to 3.0 GHZ and bam you got 1 kick-ass chip with 4 cores. Can you say bring on Crysis, Alan Wake, the new Valve engine, etc. et.c which all of the future games will be using.

 

[Denisimo]

Update your article. Its out of date.

Intel 965, 975, Officially supports 1333FSB CPU with BIOS update as of today.

http://www.asus.com/news_show.aspx?id=7866

 

[zenze589]

Forgive me as I'm a noob in many things but what exactly is g0 stepping and what is its benefit?

 

[sailer]

MMM……

I notice the absent of the AMD FX -7x models.

And I noticed the absence of my FX60. Surely its better than a lot of those celerons and such. It may only be an old fashioned 939 cpu, but its still fairly quick, especially when overclocked to 3.1 ghz.

 

[Spanki]

Forgive me as I'm a noob in many things but what exactly is g0 stepping and what is its benefit?

Lower power usage + higher allowed Tcase temps + lower voltage needed = higher overclocking.

Just google "G0 stepping".

Oh and apparently the Q6600 is moving to that stepping, with general availability starting today (the 16th).