e6850 or q6600?

Well, Im about to buy one of these processors. They are both about the same price, but I want to know which would be better value. I know everyone is saying the q6600 because you can overclock it to past 3ghz, but I probably wont want to overclock my computer. As of right now the e6850 might have an edge on the q6600 seeing that nothing is made to run quad-core, but when there are applications that take advantage of it, will the quad even be a whole lot better than they are now? There really isnt a way to tell from what I understand. What has me leaning towards the e6850 is the higher stock speed which means it will run faster while being more stable than an overclocked quad, and the fact that it will be 1333 fsb and not 1066.

Gaming, 3D Programs (3ds Max), Photoshop. Everything basically.

The Q6600 will be good for your 3D stuff for sure.

Your sig says e6600 not q6600...

That was just an example of how easy it is to overclock. The Q6600 is basicly two E6600's nitted together on to the same die. The Q6600 may not reach as high an OC because you now have to cool four cores instead of just two.

Aono do you have anything helpful to add to this post?

^^my question exactly

and since I dont want to overclock, wouldnt having the e8650 at stock speeds run my memory faster (pc2-6400) at 667mhz.

Why exactly would he have to use a lower multiplier? The FSB speed is what counts not the multiplier. As long as his FSB is set to 333 (x4=1333) and his ram is set to 333 too (333x2=667) then they should run 1:1 with no problem. 333:333 == 1:1
If I'm mistaken please correct me.

Only to say that your post was irrelevant. Was just making sure people didn’t think you were talking about the q6600 or e6850, you didn’t make it very clear.

Q6600 is what all the cool cats say is best for video encoding and editing.

For the most part. But, on the Anandtech site that was quoted, it's only better at certain applications (e.g. Windows Media) and slightly better at others, usually by a second or two. At general purpose applications, the E6850 is often better. So, I was thinking the difference is not that great. At the same price, though, maybe the Q6600 is a better choice if you're doing video stuff?

I'm pretty much on the same page as you on this but the thing is i don't really do any 3D or video stuff....at least not that much.....i usually convert video files to different format (so i can put on my PSP/IPOD video), so i'm always converting big movie files and currently im running a
Dell
P4
1.6ghz
512mb RAM

so.....it basically takes FOREVER for me to convert a file that is a little smaller than 1GB......so which would be better Q6600 or the E6850? Which one would be able to convert files quicker....i am also gonna use the new rig for gaming and just general use.....and if there isn't TOO much of a difference, i'd rather go with the E6850...since it performs better with games....and also thinking about getting a Quad Core compatible motherboard so i can upgrade in the future if i need to

well thanks guys, youve all been a big help. I'll be going to Frys tomorrow to buy one of them. Im still not sure which one i will get, but Im leaning towards the 6850 at the moment. I'll probably check at see if they even have a q6600 with the G0 stepping.

Q6600 easily, just think about things in the future, for example crysis is being optimized for 4 cores as was mentioned by the ceo of crytek. So that bodes very well for more cores.. also apps will only become faster as companies start to optimize for 4 cores.. so unless your going to upgrade again when penryn comes out just go get the Q6600