Jump to content

E6850 or Q6600?


vegettoxp
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey Guys, What happening? I was thrown off my chair when I saw the news from Intel’s new processors. I guess I can get a lot more power for my bucks. But I am being faced with a really hard problem. After read around a lot of News On Intel’s New Processors (Dual and Quad), I have a really hard choice to make. I am building a new system. Just to point out I am going to get a processor now and if I see good things from 45-nm, I will buy that when it comes out. I am also waiting for Intel’s upcoming X38 Chipset. The processor I get now (Dual or Quad or 45nm Processor) I want them to work with my new X38 Chipset. So I just wanted to give you guys my choice of my Chipset.

Now my problem is What Processor I should get now? The choices I have are:

The New Intel Core 2 Duo (E6850) (3.0Ghz) (FSB – 1333) (L2 – 4MB) (Price $266)

Or

The New Intel Core 2 Quad (Q6600) (2.40Ghz) (FSB – 1066) (L2 – 4MBx2) (Price $266)

I am not a hard-core gamer. I play games here and there. I do a lot of burning DVD’S, Music, Photoshop and the usual computer stuff. I know I have read that Quad is good for 3D Stuff and Encoding and The Dual- Core (E6850) is good for Gaming. I just wanted your guys opinion on which way I should go. I biggest problem with Quad-Core (Q6600) is that not a lot of applications are out there that will take advantage of my extra cores. But Since the Price is the same for E6850 and Q6600 ($266), I really need your guys help.

So if you guys can help me out with this problem and I let me know if these processors will work with the upcoming X38 Chipset, it would really help me out. I will by 45nm when it comes out for my New X38 Motherboard Intel or Asus Baby!

THX Guys!

P.S. Fusion

Link to comment
Share on other sites


the dual core will win over the quad core in gaming considering most games dont even make use of 1 core. if you go quad core you are ready for when applications that can use 4 threads come out and can make use of all 4 cores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. I am also in a fix over these too.

I found some info here!

I will wait for another fortnight when the real price and benchmarks would start pouring in.

If you find some info post here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take the dual core. It uses half the power. Way more room for overclocking when you need it.

That and like the previous poster said... games are more optimized for dual core. So why not get a really fast (after overclock) dual core?

But if you really want a quad... they are really good for heavy video transcoding, cad, and rendering. Not much else until games and other apps become optimized for quads.

And that might take a couple of years until they become mainstream like dual core. By that time you will have a whole new PC.

You're not future proofing by getting a quad. Just get the best dual core.

Edited by brucevangeorge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i personally want to get the quad. there is a new revision coming out, the g0, and i think its 90w. that means it runs cooler and can overclock more. the Q6600 will run fast enough for you. who cares if it give you 10FPS more in games.. the video card is what really matters.

but that's just me, i use programs that will use all cores and you cant forget about crysis :)

if you are really worried about the performance difference, then just get a really good heatsink for it and overclock it alot, i'm going water for my next build and that will definatly be nice for overclocking it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll get much better compression times with DVD encoding/transcoding using the E6850 vs the Q6600 in most applications simply because software is not yet optimized to take advantage of true multithreading. The higher clock speed will outway the benefits of more cores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read this article and it'll give you a good idea of what you should get for your usage needs:

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

The entire article is chock full of information, but to answer your question what you really want to look at is page 8.

If you're strictly building a gaming box, you'll get more performance out of the dual-core E6850. However, if you do any encoding or 3D rendering at all, the quad-core Q6600 is a better buy. Our pick is the Q6600 and if you want to make up the performance difference you can always overclock to E6850 speeds, but the chip only makes sense if you're running apps that can take advantage of four cores. As the chart above illustrates, those applications are almost exclusively limited to video encoding and 3D rendering.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next week iNTEL will release some "models in between" and come with new prices altrough we are already talking here about the new prices.

Prices and modelnumbers can be found here.

THere will be 3 types or Quad cored CPUs, the 120W, 80W and the 50W version that clocks at max. 2,66GHz for now, but it looks like a great overclocker too me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all in the Anandtech article...along with analysis of which CPUs are more cost effective for purchase with the upcoming price cuts. Basically it won't be cost effective to purchase any 1066MHz based dual-core variant with the price cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guys, thx for all you help. I have been thinking and I am leaning more and more towards the E6850, because I don't plan to keep that processor for long. I am planning to get the 45nm next year. I would like to have the quad-core, but I don't think I have many applications that would take advantage of my extra cores. Hopefully when Intel releases 45nm next year, I will get a Quad-Core with better FSB and hopefully more Clock Speed.

So would you guys recommend me getting the E6850, if I don't plan to keep the processor for too long. Thats one of the reason I am waiting for the X38 Chipset. Later next year I am gona upgrade my processor to 45nm.

After reading your guys comments I am getting more and more interested in Quad-Core!

Once again, Thx for all the input guys!

P.S. Fusion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that they're roughly the same price I'd personally go for the E6850 for now. DVD burning is only going to go as fast as your DVD drive and write the data...having a faster CPU or more cores isn't going to change that. You said you do music and Photoshop stuff...what type of music and Photoshop stuff? If you're ripping music, again, that's only going to go as fast as your optical drive can read the data (a faster CPU will only help up to a certain point). Converting or creating is a different story...but do you do enough of it to warrant getting a quad core? Photoshop...eh...yeah, quad core may help a bit...but again, do you do enough to justify a quad core?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't get a quad. No apps take full advantage of it. Its still being introduced into the market. Most apps can use a maximum of only 2 cores. So a quad would only be used to half of its potential.

I would just get a dual and overclock it to "quad speed". At least that way, the apps can take full advantage of it.

Here are some apps that use 4 cores:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=150429

E6850 vs Q6600 Common Apps:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel...?i=3038&p=8

Notice how only rendering and transcoding take any advantage of the Q6600. Sometimes significant depending on the application.

But then again, you can always overclock the E6850 since it has much more overclocking headroom than the Q6600 (stock) and blow it out of the water.

Edited by brucevangeorge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Photoshop...eh...yeah, quad core may help a bit...but again, do you do enough to justify a quad core?

Photoshop... hell no. You would be much better off getting lots of ram than a faster processor.

A fast processor only helps when applying heavy filters that require lots of math. But in general lots of RAM for Photoshop is priority number one. A fast scratch drive is priority two so swapping large chunks of memory is at a decent speed and lastly processor speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...