Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

newbie needing advice on buying a processor

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 2, 2007 10:53:03 PM

Hi! I'm in the process of getting ready to purchase a new computer. I'm not quite ready to start using Vista yet, but am designing my new system so that when I decide its time to make the switch to Vista, the computer will be ready.
I'm hand-picking every aspect of my system so that I have what I think will be the best system possible to meet my needs.
I'm blind, and use JAWS for Windows professional version as my screen reader. I typicly use my computer for word processing, web browsing, playing on-line games, and working with audio and midi files.
With that general background, I can finally get to my question:
I am torn between two processors, and need advice from folks who actually know about this stuff with regards to which one will be more responsive and reliable.
I tried using the comparison chart here on the Tom's Hardware site, but JFW didn't like it at all, and I couldn't seem to get any useful information.
Anyway, my two choices are the Intell e-6800 2.93 ghz processor and the Intel Pentium Extreme 3.73 ghz processor.
I am leaning towards the 3.73 processor because it sounds to my uneducated mind as if it would be faster, but reviews I've read on Newegg seem to indicate otherwise.
If there are any kind folks out there who could please assist me in making as informed of a buying choice as possible, I would really appreciate it.
Also, because this site is a real nightmare for me to navigate with my screen reader, I would really appreciate it a lot if responses to this message could be sent to my actual e-mail address, which is
Melissah@fuse.net.
Thanks in advance for any assistance any of you can provide in this matter, and I hope that everyone is having a really great day!
Mitmee_Pie
February 2, 2007 11:30:21 PM

Dude, you just posted a link to youtube for a blind fellow.


The core 2 with "only" 2.93 is twice as fast as a 3.73 pentium4.

Core2 all the way.
February 2, 2007 11:57:52 PM

Core2 is the way to go.
If you plan to spend $1k on a CPU, than I'll recomend you the quadcore model, Core2 Quad QX6700.
If you don't want to waste money, the E6600 is an excellent performer and is not expencive.
Anyway, the best bang for the buck is the E6400. And like Jack said, the E6400 2.13GHz outperforms the Pentium EE 965 3.73GHz.
Related resources
February 3, 2007 12:04:41 AM

Yeah, core 2 all the way, they utterly DESTROY every P4.
February 3, 2007 12:14:44 AM

Send him a Detailed, Well written response then. Just tell him that Core 2 Duo basically had a X 2 Speed factor to The Pentium(Netburst Arc) Processor. So even a E6600 or E6400(Core Arc) would be comparable to a 5Ghz Pentium Extreme Processor.
February 3, 2007 12:30:01 AM

core2 duo like every one else says.

JAWS huh 8)

that seems like something i would like to check out. :lol: 
February 3, 2007 12:39:39 AM

It took me a while to figure out how to reply on here, but I've finally figured it out, or at least I hope so, so I'd like to thank you all very much for your responses. I think my question has changed based on this information. Should I get the e6800, or would I be better of going ahead and spending the extra $15 or so for the q6700. Is it the same principle? Would the q6700 be more responsive than the e6800? I'm hoping to build a computer that I won't outgrow for quite some time. I've had the one I'm using now for about 5 years, and it's starting to get really sluggish; it's a 1.7 ghz pentiumm 4 with 512 mb of Ram, and sometimes, it takes a while for my screen reader to tell me what's going on. So, I'm looking for maximum responsiveness. Thanks again for your assistance in helping me make my final buying choices, and I hope that you all are having an awesome weekend!
Mitmee_pie
February 3, 2007 1:48:27 AM

For immediate speed and overall response the Core 2 Extreme X6800 (Dual Core) would give you the best so called "Snap, Crackle, POP". The QX6700 Core 2 Extreme (Quad-Core) would also give you similar performance but would lack that brute Speed on Stock speeds, because there are almost non-existent number of programs that could utilize the Quad-Core's Potential at the moment. Best choice for the next 2-3 Years would be the X6800 because there would be no practical usage of the extra Cores of the QX6700, the RAW speeds of the X6800 would keep you satisfied for the years to come while saving you some electricity that would used up by the Quad Monster(Roar!).
February 3, 2007 11:43:04 AM

The consensus is Core2Duo - for good reason.

The E6800 is a fine CPU - but a bit expensive. Try to consider how much processing you need - if you believe that demands are high - then the E6800 will be the right choice. The E6600 works very well for me, even in demanding situations.

Good luck.
February 3, 2007 11:56:44 AM

Quote:
It took me a while to figure out how to reply on here, but I've finally figured it out, or at least I hope so, so I'd like to thank you all very much for your responses. I think my question has changed based on this information. Should I get the e6800, or would I be better of going ahead and spending the extra $15 or so for the q6700. Is it the same principle? Would the q6700 be more responsive than the e6800? I'm hoping to build a computer that I won't outgrow for quite some time. I've had the one I'm using now for about 5 years, and it's starting to get really sluggish; it's a 1.7 ghz pentiumm 4 with 512 mb of Ram, and sometimes, it takes a while for my screen reader to tell me what's going on. So, I'm looking for maximum responsiveness. Thanks again for your assistance in helping me make my final buying choices, and I hope that you all are having an awesome weekend!
Mitmee_pie

Get the Q6700 then; a bit slower than the XE6800 for singlethreaded apps but much better for the future as most games and apps ate going to be multithreaded.
February 3, 2007 12:12:48 PM

As a future proof, the QX6700 is a better choice over X6800. It has 4 cores at 2.67GHz, the X6800 has two cores at 2.93GHz. For single-threaded apps, the X6800 can offer 10% more performance, compared to the QX6700. But for multi-threaded apps the QX6700 can offer 82% more performance than the X6800. More and more software developers are making multicore optimised apps, but it will take some time before we can taste the benefit of quadcore.
If I were you, I would get an E6600 which is 22% slower than X6800, but it is only one third of X6800's price. In April and October there will be a great price cuts of Intel CPUs. If you get E6600 now you will save $700, and latter this year, for $700 you'll be able to buy a QX6700 or better.
February 3, 2007 1:06:52 PM

We have JAWS 8.0 running flawlessly on a 3.4G Pentium 4 system along with a bunch of other applications, so you have some headroom. Unless you have a bunch of money to blow and you need the speed right now, I would go with a E6400 or E6600. You can spend 200 to 300 dollars now, and then another 300 or so in a couple years when (or if) your system gets too slow. Even if you have to upgrade, you will still save a couple hundred dollars. With a product like JAWS, I wouldn't plan on going to Vista too soon. If you do, make sure you get a ton of memory (2 gigabytes or more).
I wish I had that kind of money to spend on an X6800; that processor costs more than the entire new system I'm building...
February 3, 2007 2:45:38 PM

Quote:
It took me a while to figure out how to reply on here, but I've finally figured it out, or at least I hope so, so I'd like to thank you all very much for your responses. I think my question has changed based on this information. Should I get the e6800, or would I be better of going ahead and spending the extra $15 or so for the q6700. Is it the same principle? Would the q6700 be more responsive than the e6800? I'm hoping to build a computer that I won't outgrow for quite some time. I've had the one I'm using now for about 5 years, and it's starting to get really sluggish; it's a 1.7 ghz pentiumm 4 with 512 mb of Ram, and sometimes, it takes a while for my screen reader to tell me what's going on. So, I'm looking for maximum responsiveness. Thanks again for your assistance in helping me make my final buying choices, and I hope that you all are having an awesome weekend!
Mitmee_pie


My goodness yes, you should get the quad core for a little bit more if you have the money to spend. You can always overclock, you can't add more cores - as the old saying goes.

Lets try this, you tell us the amount you want to spend - and we can get you there.
February 3, 2007 2:49:08 PM

Quote:
you can't add more cores.

Yes, you can. All you need is another X6800 and a glue. :tongue: :lol: 
February 3, 2007 5:56:44 PM

Quote:
you can't add more cores.

Yes, you can. All you need is another X6800 and a glue. :tongue: :lol: 
Or "upgrade" to Intel's "new" dual socket, 100% server, mombo.
!