Are core 2 quads really good in 2017?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
budgetgamer12345

budgetgamer12345

Respectable
Sep 8, 2017
490
3
1,965
Hello guys!
So i´ve searched today hours to find a reason why core 2 quads are better than i3 and i5.
So a guy overclocked his core 2 quad q6600 to 4,2GHZ and surprisingly the q6600 at 4,2GHZ HAS THE SAME PERFORMANCE AS THE i7 2600K OMG!!
Why are people buying then 200+ dollars for i7´s when you can get a 10 dollar core 2 quad and can easly overclock them at +4GHZ?
The LGA775 overclockable motherboard that i bought is arriving within 3 days and im super excited to overclock my Q6600 to 4GHZ.
So my question is: Can my overclocked Q6600 have the same performance as the i5 Series or not?
Because many people overclocked them Q6600´s to 4GHZ and they have the same benchmark scores as first gen i7´s CPU´s
Regards!
 
Solution
dextermat
+1 core 2 quad are remarkable cpu and nice overclocker but, since the architecture and technology is different any core i5/i7 will perform better not overclocked.
The bigger problem for core 2 quad is heat dissipation. @ 3.8 ghz or more. It requires more but safe voltage.
You need a great aftermarket cooler.
For best experience and bang for bucks, get newer equipment.
e.g (a core 2 quad @ 200-300 $ system is not a good investment vs a 800-1000$ system because of warranty and system failure)
For modern gaming, the core 2 quad will fall behind even overclocked because of reason above.

If you get a core 2 quad and don't have any computer. It sure is a good thing though.
Sort by date Sort by votes
Roland Of Gilead

Roland Of Gilead

Titan
Aug 8, 2008
10,287
2,241
77,690
Are you trolling? The guy you've said who's OC'ed a q6600 to 4.2 is BS'ing!!! Unless he had some LN2 at hand and a professional based OC set up.

A q6600 OC easily to 3ghz, with a bit of time and dedication 3.2-3.4. To assert that 4 ghz is easily reachable is absurd.

The answer is NO/NOT. The i7 2600k will stomp all over a Q6600 even with a good OC on the Q6600 (and by that I mean 3.2-3.4)
If indeed someone was to get a Q6600 to 4.2, it will have serious voltage running through it, and I could pretty much guarantee it would burn out pretty quickly. You'd need so many variables to get it right, and unless your an expert it won't happen. I don't mean any disrespect there. Theoretically though, With a Q6600 at 4.2, and the i7 at stock speed of 3.8 Turbo, they would be close. OC the I7 though, and it's all over for the q6600.

Ditch the Q6600 and buy a decent modern CPU with a new mobo and ram.

 
Upvote 1 Downvote
budgetgamer12345

budgetgamer12345

Respectable
Sep 8, 2017
490
3
1,965

But many people reached easly 4 ghz with G0 steppings and just cheap motherboards with just only overclocking the FSB to 445 or 444 x 9 multipliers that means 4GHZ.
But im still happy with the overclocked Q6600 because i cant even afford the cheapest i3 CPU :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Roland Of Gilead

Roland Of Gilead

Titan
Aug 8, 2008
10,287
2,241
77,690


:) Listen, I loved my Q6600 GO, the best I could get out of it was 3.2. That with a decent mobo and cooling. That's a 24/7 stable OC. Those other people saying they get 4.0+, maybe they did, but it purely just for benchmarking (and probably failing stress testing too). The point is, for that chip without some specialist cooling you're gonna kill that chip quickly, with the type of voltages required to get 4ghz. I've seen people saying they are running it at 1.55-1.6v. Thats just insane.

But anyway, just keep the expectations in check.

Keep saving the dosh for something new. Your new machine is just a few paychecks away :)

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
feelinfroggy777

feelinfroggy777

Glorious
Dec 13, 2016
5,721
135
45,990


If your happy with your CPU, then what does it matter what other people think which is better. The purpose of your hardware is to meet your needs. So if you game, and the Q6600 gives you the performance you want, then fantastic. If not, then go for something else.

The real question is, what are you using the PC for? If you are wanting a powerhouse workstation or gaming build, it will come up short in certain applications. If you just want a web browser, it will be just fine. There is no point in having an i7 to watch youtube videos.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
D

Dugimodo

Distinguished
Sep 22, 2011
1,393
11
20,115
Many people easily reached 4 ghz? I'd need some good evidence to believe that. More like a few professional overclockers with exceptionally good examples of the Q6600. The 2600K has been overclocked past 5Ghz by some people as well, not something most of us will ever achieve much like getting a Q6600 past 4Ghz but it has happened.

A lot of people make wild ridiculous claims on the internet, unless there is evidence to back it up I just assume it's not true. A quick look through google and it seems Keith12 is much more realistic with his numbers.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
dextermat

dextermat

Splendid
Sep 21, 2007
4,957
0
24,960
+1 core 2 quad are remarkable cpu and nice overclocker but, since the architecture and technology is different any core i5/i7 will perform better not overclocked.
The bigger problem for core 2 quad is heat dissipation. @ 3.8 ghz or more. It requires more but safe voltage.
You need a great aftermarket cooler.
For best experience and bang for bucks, get newer equipment.
e.g (a core 2 quad @ 200-300 $ system is not a good investment vs a 800-1000$ system because of warranty and system failure)
For modern gaming, the core 2 quad will fall behind even overclocked because of reason above.

If you get a core 2 quad and don't have any computer. It sure is a good thing though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
Roland Of Gilead

Roland Of Gilead

Titan
Aug 8, 2008
10,287
2,241
77,690


That's a really interesting read. Good spot!

Its interesting to see just how much the Q6600 holds back modern GPU's, but also how the i5 2500k isn't too far off the I7 6700k (all things considered).

Nice article for a lot of people who have older systems. But as feelingfroggy777 said, it depends a lot of the use of the system. A Q6600 can still rock at web browsing and low end gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
W

william p

Splendid
Sep 22, 2010
3,788
100
30,340
I've run games and benchmarks at 3.72Ghz with a QX6800 G0. I did get a CPUZ validation at 4Ghz, but lots of Voltage for that. But the 65nm C2 Quads aren't the good ones anyway. The 45nm QX9650 will run 4.15Ghz and performs better clock for clock also. I consider the Q6600 irrelevant now because there are much better options in that platform. The Q6600 is the oldest and slowest C2Q.
Here's a Dell T3400 QX9650 scoring 57% CPU at userbenchmark.com.
http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/3530803
An overclocked Q6600 will score high 40%.
Why would you compare the worst C2Q there is to newer (old) CPUs. The best of the C2Q can still hang in there at 1080P with newer GPUs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom