Which of these Core 2 Deals is the best?

[SpeedyVV]

I would like to upgrade my current setup with an E4300 (OCed to 3Ghz).

I have a Evga 680SLI, not sure if it matters?

I will be using it for Development work and Gaming.

Please let me know which way to go and if possible the rationale.

 

[mrmez]

Go quad.
For the $ difference u will benifit most from the ESPECIALLY with ur OC.
Also... if u game, as i do, also running an E4300 @3+Ghz.
U will find more Ghz are not getting u anymore fps :/
I find almost NO difference in games between 2.5 and 3.5Ghz

If i was upgrading now, id be an idiot NOT to go quad.

PS... are those prices USD? For the cpu only?
Seems a little steep considering the q6600 is $349AUD
Or is the USD THAT weak atm???

 

[swifty_morgan]

I don't know where you're shopping, but they're all too expensive. Let's get a little more realistic, then ask the question.

 

[StevieD]

Regardless of the source of the chips. The Quad is the way to go.

 

[Nightowl0707]

Do you mean the best deal for the Retailer? Those prices aren't realistic.

 

[kingoftherings]

I voted for the one I'd most likely buy. Which is the cheapest one, the E6750.

Sure the Q6600 is a better processor, but I'm cheap.

 

[Eucharistadorer]

I voted for the one I bought before the price drop, E6600.....

*walks away with head down in shame*

 

[Maziar]

Definitely Q6600 ,

 

[Piercey]

Tom's hardware cpu tests:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

the E6850 actually performs just as well, sometimes better than the Q6600. It's very close. People shouldn't automatically just jump to "quad core is better" without thinking about it. This is stock though, it's a different story overclocking.

I'm personally finding it hard to decide between the two. Some say E6850 and some say Q6600.

Have a look at the tests, then make a judgment again.

 

[croc]

I would like to upgrade my current setup with an E4300 (OCed to 3Ghz).

I have a Evga 680SLI, not sure if it matters?

I will be using it for Development work and Gaming.

Please let me know which way to go and if possible the rationale.

Is your development platform capable of using more that one thread? More than 2? Is your development work more important than your gaming?

Questions... No reply necessary.

 

[SpeedyVV]

Thanks for all the replies.

I did indeed read the E6850 vs Q6600 THG article, but that is why I was asking the question.

Initially i was just going to get the quad but after the article I was not so sure anymore, psecially since my Dev Env does not take advantage of 4 cores :-(.

Also I do plan to OC regardless of which CPU to get. So looks like the E6750 might be the way to go cause, I dont think I will get much more performance from the Q6600 with a 40% price premium.

I really worry that the momemt I make that decision, a whole bunch of stuff comes out to support Quads.

Sorry I forgot to say, but those are Canadian dollars and of course real prices in Canada.

With all the comments about it being unrealistic, I wonder if it warrants a trip to Buffalo ;-)

EDIT ----------------------
Just checked the prices on Newegg and there is about a $20-$30 price premium on CPUs by shopping in Canada. I guess thats a good trade for free health care ;-) and certainly not worth the trip to buffalo.


I wonder what is the price diff, nw that the US and Canadian $ is pretty much on par.

 

[bruce555]

I just found a Q6600 for 298 retail with no sale at directcanada.

EDIT: Actually I wouldn't even buy right now at all. I think it would be a complete waste of money. You already have a core2 running a 3ghz and unless it's blown I'd wait for Penryn since your MOBO can handle it.

 

[aevm]

Surprising that nobody caught this before. Yeah, the Q6600 will give you the same or lower performance than what you already have, in most programs. It will be a major improvement in some things like video encoding, but you probably don't do much of that. Another vote to wait for Penryn...

 

[zenmaster]

1) Forget the E6600. It is not likely to give you much of a performance boost. With the E4300 already at 3.0Ghz, don't expect a large noticable difference.

What Type of RAM do you have? I will presume DDR2-800 and base my responses upon that.

2) E6750 - This will clock to just over 3.1 Ghz without OCing your RAM. Not sure how high it will go, but this chip again may limit you.

3) E6850 - This will clock to below 3.6Ghz without OCing your RAM. You should now start seeing a difference that may be worth spending your money.

4) Q6600 - This will clock to just above 3.6Ghz without OCing your RAM. This chip will also give you extra cores. As you push your RAM beyond 800Mhz, you will get more Mhz increases with this than the E6850.

For this reason, I would definately suggest the Q6600 for you.
You will likely be able to OC it higher as well have more cores.

If you were building fresh with DDR2-1066 RAM, then I would be in more of a toss up between the Q6600 and the E6850.

 

[SpeedyVV]

zenmaster, great reply. I am somewhat of a n00b so this is great info.

... What Type of RAM do you have? I will presume DDR2-800 and base my responses upon that.

Yes I have a pair of Corsair Twin2x1024-6400C4. I run it unlinked at 4-4-4-12-2T at 800MHz.[/quote]

2) E6750 - This will clock to just over 3.1 Ghz without OCing your RAM. Not sure how high it will go, but this chip again may limit you.

4) Q6600 - This will clock to just above 3.6Ghz without OCing your RAM. This chip will also give you extra cores. As you push your RAM beyond 800Mhz, you will get more Mhz increases with this than the E6850.

For this reason, I would definately suggest the Q6600 for you.
You will likely be able to OC it higher as well have more cores.

If you were building fresh with DDR2-1066 RAM, then I would be in more of a toss up between the Q6600 and the E6850.

I did not realize that the E6750 would not give me almost any improvement.

So if I am going to buy anything it looks like the Q6600.

Off course I could wait for Penryn like aevm and bruce suggested. Not sure what that means in price or performance, but I'll do some research.

BTW, one thing I did not mention (because my son lurks around here) is that part of the reason for the new CPU is that I want to surprise him with a "budget" build using some new and some re-using parts from my build as I upgrade.

 

[boner]

I would like to upgrade my current setup with an E4300 (OCed to 3Ghz).

I have a Evga 680SLI, not sure if it matters?

I will be using it for Development work and Gaming.

Please let me know which way to go and if possible the rationale.

dude the Q6600 it's at $294 in newegg.com

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115017

 

[shadowmaster625]

The quad isnt worth a penny more than $266. Dont forget, while there may be a few apllications that will actually push your cpu past 50%, none of them are free! Free stuff, like any nsoftware that uses the Lame encoder for example, does not take advantage of 4 cores. Get a dualcore and OC the crap out of it.

 

[Maziar]

plz read some reviews SHADOW , :
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=8

E6850 is a very nice CPU and performs very well , but when comes to PHOTOSHOP , 3DMAX.... it loses to a Q6600

and also future games like Crysis will utilize QuadCore , and again as u see in the review that i posted , in lost planet cave , Q6600 is better ,

 

[bruce555]

@ SpeedyVV. The penryn will give you huge improvements when it comes out. I would wait, the new core is a native quad and has lower tdp and 45nm and will allow for crazy overclocks.

 

[dobby]

a bit pricey, but a OEM Quad is the way to go

 

[rammedstein]

e6750, the board you have can do the insane fsb needed, the chip can too, it will oc like a trooper, your board also has the 4:3 memory divider so you mayn't need as good ram to get there

 

[MU_Engineer]

I would like to upgrade my current setup with an E4300 (OCed to 3Ghz).

I have a Evga 680SLI, not sure if it matters?

I will be using it for Development work and Gaming.

Please let me know which way to go and if possible the rationale.

First of all, an E4300 at 3.0 GHz is still a pretty new and potent chip. It will continue to perform well in games for some time yet- you should be looking at upping your GPUs at least one or two times before you think about upgrading the CPU unless you have a 1024x768 CRT that scans at 200 Hz or some ridiculous figure. You probably have an LCD or 1280x1024 or better, so the CPU doesn't matter a whole ton. I could sit you in front of my X2 4200+ at stock box and your E4300 @ 3.0 GHz box with the same GPU and monitor and you'd probably not be able to tell which one was which when playing games.

If your development work is anything less than working on an entire large, resource-intensive program by yourself, you'll see your CPU sitting idle 99.99% of the time while you type and run at 100% for the 0.01% of the time you're compiling or running the program. If your development work is on a very large, hard-to-compile program, then I'd consider a workstation with two low-end quad-core CPUs as that will likely help you out more than a fast dual-core or even quad-core can. If the build is that big, you're probably using a Makefile or something that allows for parallel compilation or you should if you are not. In that case, more cores is a godsend- take it from a Gentoo user and habitual compiler addict.

So in short, I say that none of your choices are likely the best one, but if you *had* to pick, the Q6600 would be the one you want.

 

[SpeedyVV]

First of all, an E4300 at 3.0 GHz is still a pretty new and potent chip. It will continue to perform well in games for some time yet- you should be looking at upping your GPUs at least one or two times before you think about upgrading the CPU ...

If your development work is anything less than working on an entire large, resource-intensive program by yourself, you'll see your CPU sitting idle 99.99% of the time while you type and run at 100% for the 0.01% of the time you're compiling or running the program. If your development work is on a very large, hard-to-compile program, then I'd consider a workstation with two low-end quad-core CPUs as that will likely help you out more than a fast dual-core or even quad-core can. If the build is that big, you're probably using a Makefile or something that allows for parallel compilation or you should if you are not. In that case, more cores is a godsend- take it from a Gentoo user and habitual compiler addict.

So in short, I say that none of your choices are likely the best one, but if you *had* to pick, the Q6600 would be the one you want.

MU_Engineer, thanks a lot for your informative reply.

I do a lot of development in a WinXP32 IBM\Rational environment using both RSA (Rational Software Architech) and ClearCase. Sometime I have to do this in a VMWare environment.

I have no idea what the limiting factor would be for such an environment or even if it takes advantage of multiple cores. I guess i could call support and find out ;-)

As for gaming, after doing some reading, I would have to agree that CPU is not my problem but my GPUs. I run 2 7600GTs in SLI for gaming.

For development work because I use 3 displays I need to use the 2 cards in non SLI. 2x20" at 1200x1600 and 1 30" at 2560x1600.

I would love to get a 8800GTX for gaming, but I would also need to get an 8600GT because I can't use a 7600GT with the 8800 under XP and I dont want to go Vista :-(