Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ntel Core 2 Extreme X6800 Conroe vsIntel Core 2 Extreme QX67

Last response: in CPUs
May 13, 2007 12:52:23 PM

whats the difference because the price isn't that different. and im thinking about a new rig so i was thinking about getting one. is the difference jusst there speeds?thanks
May 13, 2007 1:02:44 PM

X6800 @ 2.93Ghz (Dual-Core) With Unlocked Multiplier

QX6700 @ 2.66Ghz (Quad-Core) With Unlocked Multiplier(better)

Just Set the QX6700 to 266 X 11= 2.93Ghz and you'll have a QX6800(Unreleased to PC public)
May 13, 2007 1:42:58 PM

so the 6700 is much better and will the quads last longer and perform better later?
Related resources
May 13, 2007 1:52:25 PM

Well having 4 Cores is undeniably worth more than having a faster clock speed in this case, the Quads easily can be Overclocked to ~3Ghz range to trump a Stock X6800 or QX6800

To simply answer the Question: Yes the Quad's should last longer and Perform better than the Duals(If you Overclock for Single Threaded Applications) In Multi-threaded environments they will trump the Dual-core and will future proof you if you shall decide to go High-End Gaming and a CPU taxing Environment.
May 13, 2007 2:00:35 PM

ok thank you very much i am looking at the builders thing on the homepage and it looks like a good list im just making some changes. so if i go with the asus striker board and VIGOR GAMING CLT-M2I 92mm Thermal Electric CPU Cooler how much do you think i can hit? also is taht the best cpu cooler or is there something else?
May 13, 2007 10:20:55 PM

May 13, 2007 10:43:02 PM

The QX6700 is a better chip for future use.
May 13, 2007 11:27:15 PM

Absolutely. In general quad is the future-proof way to go, if you do more than e-mail and Solitaire.

Now the question is, how much is the OP willing to pay for the prestige of an "extreme" label on the CPU? A Q6600 costs hundreds less than a QX6700, it's almost as fast, and most times the PC will wait on the hard disk or DVD anyway. I was thinking along the lines of a QX6700 myself at some time, but it's looking rather silly now.
May 14, 2007 12:20:31 AM

Well actually to be perfectly honest i own both cpu's

and i am much more happy with my x6800 core 2 extreme

its definitely faster by a large margin on many of my games.

there might be a market for quad cores in the future but it's definitely not now.

besides it definitely bother's me that the q6700 is not native quad core. i mean seriously! WTF!!

I am a system builder for dell so i get to play with these parts often.

trust me get a x6800 you wont regret it. theres a reason it maintains a premium price equavilent to that of the quad core.
May 14, 2007 12:30:30 AM


besides it definitely bother's me that the q6700 is not native quad core. i mean seriously! WTF!!

Please don't let it bother you, it's not healthy to take these matters to heart. You might get an ulcer or something. :twisted: Just look at AMD's executives, they felt just like you and now AMD has wasted a year and 611 million bucks in their quest for the perfect native quad-core. In the meantime Intel's pathetic glued-up non-native quad-cores are winning all the multithreaded benchmarks and making big bucks.

Back to the OP's question. It depends on what you do with the PC and how much money you have. Lots of money and gaming: X6800 is best. Not so much money and gaming: E6600 for example. Video processing or programming or CAD: Q6600/QX6700 depending on budget.
May 14, 2007 12:57:27 AM

Well actually to be perfectly honest i own both cpu's

I doubt your honesty.

besides it definitely bother's me that the q6700 is not native quad core. i mean seriously! WTF!!

Considering there's no "native" quad core in the market I don't see why you should be so disturbed. At least Intel has been providing four cores in one chip for months now, something nobody else has been able to achieve.
May 14, 2007 8:39:44 PM

well i was thinking between e6600 or maybe the 500 quad core but would qx6700 outperform them?
May 14, 2007 9:33:31 PM

All the top end coolers are pretty close performancewise, unless you go liquid, then you might be able to get even more out of the proc.

What other hardware are you looking at putting in the system.
May 15, 2007 12:54:45 AM

ok build parts. also i kinda want to keep it around 2.5k or under. i don't need a mouse or speakers

build 1
mobo-EVGA 122-CK-NF68-T1 LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI

cpu-Intel Core 2 Duo E6600

case-Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel case

case fan Antec 761345-75024-0 120mm Blue LED Case Fan

hd Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3320620AS (Perpendicular Recording Technology) 320GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s

op drive-Pioneer Black 18X DVD

psu-OCZ GameXStream


video card-EVGA 768-P2-N831-AR GeForce 8800GTX

lcd-cHIMEI CMV 221D-NBC Black 22" 5ms DVI Widescreen LCD Monitor

keyboard-Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard

os-Microsoft Windows XP Professional

optional stuff
heatsink-ZALMAN 9700 LED 110mm 2 Ball CPU Cooler

sound card-Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer 7.1 Channels 24-bit 96KHz PCI Interface Sound Card

build 2
mobo- ASUS Striker Extreme LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX The Ultimate Gaming Motherboard

cpu Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700

ram- Crucial Ballistix 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1000 (PC2 8000) Dual Channel Kit

video card same as in build 1
hard-drive same as in build 1

case- LIAN LI PC-60APLUSII W Silver Aluminum

psu- there a difference

op drive-

op stuff im thinking aobut

are these heatsinks better
the zalman one in build 1
the one in build 2 vigor
this one
or these two
May 15, 2007 9:23:47 PM

is this video card better Radeon HD 2900 XT
May 18, 2007 11:31:48 PM

when Intel uses the extreme name they usually support the chip by not selling it cheap later.

the 840 died quick it really sucked, re-released as the regular 840 at $200

the 955 died at $995
the 965 actually lives on today - even though i do not understand why

the x6800 is cooler running is a superior choice for compact systems

the qx6700 and qx6800 - i expect the x6700 will be phased out in 4-6 months when amd release the so called "true quad core"

if you water cooling go with the q chip
if you running a micro atx or shuttle take the x6800
May 19, 2007 1:11:57 PM

ok on toms hardware heres a quote Surprise, no Quad Core for this system: very few games can properly use even the two cores available on the X6800, and readily-available QX6700 processors typically under-perform the X6800 due to the latter's higher clock speed. also build 1 isn't bad right?