Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

q6600 vs e8400 - Page 2

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
March 25, 2008 1:46:57 AM

Gill - Yep, it's a thing of the past now...as is gaming at 1024x768 given the affordability of hardware!
March 25, 2008 3:38:51 AM

Thats a very good point, Evil, how else would they make money? Those things are designed to last their warranty period and then some witch gives em' head room. BUT... how else would they make money if they were made to last 50 years and not around 5?

Come on, people, think they wanna sell you the fastest product they can make, and one that lasts forever? Haha, now thats really funny if people believed that! How the hell would ya make money once everyone has one? ;) 

They gotta break, man!
So, since they have to break anyways, Flame on!

--Lupi!
March 25, 2008 10:31:28 AM

max it while you can!!!
Related resources
March 25, 2008 12:22:44 PM

Lupi,
I agree with u in that aspect regarding cars in particular...I don't know about computers though. Most of my friends and I keep our computers on 24/7 and have had them running for years... Mind you we weren't OCing anything back then so taht might have something 2 do with it! :) 

March 25, 2008 9:00:20 PM

Instead of leaving the pc on for 24/7, you should use the wake up alarm thingy. What it does is the system will wake up at a set time everyday.

Lupi, I agree with you. It's becoming very apparent especially in electronics. They do this purposely so they can make more money obviously. I remember how washing machines lasted 20years but now they only last 4-5years. Some advancement we're making in technology huh?
March 25, 2008 10:09:48 PM

Evil. Really? I've never seen a wake up alarm thing, but now that sounds like a good solution to saving more energy..I'll have to look into that.

As for technology....It's funny, it does make things better/easier but due to the complexity they tend to break down more...Simple works, old washers were simple, old cars were too. But take a look at the BMW 700 series, my buddy who is a mechanic says that car spends 1/2 the year due to network issues (it has like 15 computers in it!).... There's a balance we should find between convenience and complexity. :)  Just my two cents....

March 25, 2008 10:13:17 PM

Gill: What happened to your test results...Post back! :) 
March 26, 2008 12:41:54 AM

1750349,55,140513 said:
Instead of leaving the pc on for 24/7, you should use the wake up alarm thingy. What it does is the system will wake up at a set time everyday.

i've been reading through the posts, you guys are hilarious. Sounds like dig should wake his ass up a little earlier so he's got more than 5 mins to watch the news... there's no reason to leave your computer on all day bro, especially your whole family, just put em to sleep.....

anyway I need some help deciding on a couple things:
1. two 8800GTS 512 -or- one 9800GX2
2. OCZ reaper hpc PC-9200 (4 x 1GB) -or- kingston hyperX DDR2-1066/PC2-8500 (4 x 1GB)
3. is it possible to run three 9600 GT's in sli on the 780i board
4. on top of all that which chip? Q6600 or E8400 (I'm leaning towards the E)

any help appreciated!
March 26, 2008 12:49:11 AM

1.) 8800GTS 512MB SLI, 9800GX2 way to expensive.
2.) How about a 2x2GB set? You can get one for less than $90. You should also stick with a DDR2 800 set, not much performance difference.
3.) 3 x 9600GT? They don't have support for Tri-SLI, I'm pretty sure.
4.) If you game a lot, E8400.
March 26, 2008 2:17:15 AM

Archi: hahaha, I'm sooo not a morning person, if you knew me ,you'd know why. :) 

As for your q's: I can't comment about #1 or #2 , they are expensive as evil said and not practical for my tastes. As for 3, there are boards that support tri-sli, I think the 780i high end boards do this, but you have to research this...Note: I doubt there is ANY real world performance in such a system...This from a guy who talks about saving energy each card would consume ~200+watts, = 600 watts just for your vid cards man....In your system , you'd need a 1000W power supply which is terrible to leave running on 24/7!

As for #4: I've had this debate as well, if you're not OCing the e8400 is the best bet in my opinion. However, I'm trying to do some major ocing here with the q6600 to get it to 3.6, so I'll bet there is little to no (maybe 3-4 fps) diff in gaming at 3.6 vs 4-4.2 (q6600 vs e8400) since the GPU is more the bottleneck at such high clock speeds.

But hey, if someone has some evidence to prove me otherwise, go for it, I haven't bought my system yet :D ! hahaha.

March 26, 2008 3:08:11 AM

get the e series only if you are speed freak who just wanna get high numbers.but quad will be rhe standard in the future where games will be optimise for quad core.
March 26, 2008 3:10:40 AM

3.6 is easily achievable on high end cooler.im limited to 3g at the moment.anytime i go higher the system become unstable.i will try to find out why.maybe its my cooler is the limit.
March 26, 2008 5:37:15 AM

Not many game fully takes advantage of Quads, so it's rather pointless. It's also easier to hit 4GHz on the E8400 than 3.6GHz on a Q6600. Heat is also an issue for the Q6600 at such high speeds. For most games, the E8400 will be better.
March 26, 2008 1:37:12 PM

Gill: I agree with you there. I'll be using a TRUE heatsink and on the Hardocp forums, there are MANY ppl hiting 3.6 on the q6600. See my link:

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1138241

Evil: Please look at my link and tell me how hard it is to reach 3.6. These are all orthos/prime stable and I believe cpu-z validated as well.
Based on this database, it seems very possible with the right equipment to hit 3.6...However, the e8400s are hitting 4-4.2 as well :) 

Also, Evil's right, hardly any games do support quads now. However, if you do OC to 3.6, that is more than enough power for any games of today and in the future the games will go quad (2 years at least is my bet). Personally I don't upgrade my entire computer very often, just my graphics card. So for me I want a base computer that will last a long time (last computer I kept for 5 years), but will still play the latest games with a gpu upgrade.

It's a tough decision, the question is do you want to keep this comp for say 2 years and upgrade? then go e8400, but if you're like me, you want something that will last for some time (never mind the added benefits of true multitasking). :) 

Again I'm no expert here, but based on that link I gave, it shows what people can hit on their chips with the right equipment.
March 26, 2008 1:55:24 PM

G0 Quad! Thats a very tough choice. 4.2 x 2, or 3.6 easily x 4.
So thats a choice between 8 Ghz and 14 Ghz, lol, thats tough! I guess it depends on if you are click happy? I click on everything I can see! Therefor I need more processing power for background and running apps.

Then again, since I use vista, and vista uses 4 cores. My over all experience should be faster. I know alot of junk running on Vista doesnt use 4 cores, but Since vista does, that should mean your OS is alot more happy being able to basically do what it wants, and not bother you when it is, by slowing everything else down.

--Lupi!
March 26, 2008 2:05:44 PM

Lupi:
Yeah it's a very tough call, that Hardocp database is great and helped me make my decision. At the end of the day, I don't want my Norton Antivirus/Spyware apps slowing down my gaming so the quads will definately help that out!

I just figure at 3.6 with EITHER chip, the CPU is no longer the limiting factor, its the GPU (most games are), so once you eliminate the cpu bottleneck, then it becomes a moot point on the debate since you also get a lot of extra multitasking with the Quad.

Evil: Post back when u read that link , I'd like to hear your thoughts. :) 
March 27, 2008 3:32:11 AM

just because it's quad core doesn't mean your getting 4x3.6Ghz right?

As for the cards im gonna go with the two 8800GTS 512's. I found a great deal on some good RAM in another forum. check it out here if you want: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
-its G.SKILL 4GB(2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit for $144 (savin money for elsewhere)...

I decided on the E8400 for now. My last two questions are about cooling and motherboard...
-is a Zalman CNPS9700 good enough or maybe the 1000 (keep in mind I'm gonna have a cooler master cosmos s case
(it's huge with hella fans)... And the motherboard I was gonna go nforce 780i (which I like a lot), but now I'm thinking Intel ASUS P5E LGA 775 Intel X38 ATX or maybe even the X48.

Thanks for your input.....
March 27, 2008 10:21:44 AM

but quad core is future proof as many of us and many forum have said.and why doesnt it mean quad = 3.6x4?its when you can launch 4 things at once its like you are do a job that 4 computer(single core) can do on 1 quad core or 2 computer if its dual core.and whats the total computtional power you got?4x3.6G!simple isnt it?
March 27, 2008 3:53:29 PM

Archi,
You might want to start your on thread about your build.. I don't know bout those components so I have no comment. :) 

As Gill said, quad core is more future proof and can OC very well, it's your call at the end of the day.

March 27, 2008 3:56:16 PM

you got your opinion and options to pick.let us know what your decision is.as many people and even i would say high spedd dual core will benefit you more at todays software progression.if you are speed freak or do upgrade regularly get a dual core.if not quad core just around the corner.
March 27, 2008 5:11:16 PM

It's funny. I actually have the q6600, but I still recommend the e8400 to other people. I think it's because I secretly want 4+ ghz.....

Perhaps with some more tweaking and some lapping I can get 500x8 out of my rig....
March 27, 2008 5:24:36 PM

LOL perp... that's just an ego thing, I battled that as well...but practicality came out on top!

Btw, is the ocz 600 stealthextreme good enough for a quad 6600 rig oc'd (with a 8800gt)?

Going to order tomorrow....
March 27, 2008 5:41:54 PM

Q6600 G0 3.6ghz on Tuniq Tower 120 - 1.38v? or something like that 71 max after 7 hours of prime. usually hovers around 55. Of course a better air cooler would be able to do better :) 
March 27, 2008 6:02:59 PM

i can achieve 73C with only 3.15g@1.35v!!!lol
March 27, 2008 6:17:57 PM

I'd say 600w psu is good enough.
March 27, 2008 6:24:02 PM

i have got a 850w psu!haha
March 27, 2008 7:08:46 PM

ha, Yeah I'll stick with the 600W for now, upgrade later if I have too... :) 
March 27, 2008 7:19:03 PM

but 600w psu is adaquet for any quad core 1 graphics 2 stick ram and upto 2 hard drive system.
March 27, 2008 7:21:00 PM

dignatec said:
Evil: Please look at my link and tell me how hard it is to reach 3.6. These are all orthos/prime stable and I believe cpu-z validated as well.
Based on this database, it seems very possible with the right equipment to hit 3.6...However, the e8400s are hitting 4-4.2 as well :) 

Yeah, 3.6GHz is pretty easy to reach, as long as you have the proper cooling on the Q6600. As you can see, nearly everyone who hits 3.6GHz or higher uses high end cooling like the TRUE. As for the E8400, you can hit 4GHz with a much cheaper cooler, like the Ultima 90. My point is, it's easier to OC the E8400 to 4GHz than the Q6600 to 3.6GHz due to the E8400 being cooler.
March 27, 2008 7:29:36 PM

I agree with you 100%, but I'm up for the challenge :)  Plus I've already configured my plan to order all of their parts...

I'll probably be bugging you guys next week for some help/tips with the OC, but I feel pretty confident I'll be able to hit the speed I want to.

Thanks for all the help everyone, this is a great msg board.

Here is my final proposed build:

My Rig:
q6600 g0
Asus p5k premium
XFX 8800gt 512 mb
TRUE hs (with a scythe s-flex 120mm fan- 65 cfm)
OCZ Stealthxtream 600W PSU
Antec 900 Gaming case
2 gigs ocz gold (or platinum depending on $) ddr2-800 ram
500gb WD SE Caviar hd
Samung dvd writer (20x).
March 27, 2008 7:31:46 PM

We'll be looking forward to it...I suppose. ;) 
March 28, 2008 1:36:20 PM

Coolio.

Just decided to go for Crucial Ballistix ram instead.
March 28, 2008 2:39:00 PM

good choice.looking forward to see what you can achieve!
March 28, 2008 5:43:45 PM

Thanks, comp will be ordered this weekend, should have it mid-late next week. :) 

April 7, 2008 9:33:09 PM

Hi everyone,
Posting back. I've OC'd my computer at 333x9=3.0Ghz with prime 95 for about an hour so far and my temps are b/w 45-51 C. So far so good.

Vcore is on auto however. How do I determine my vid (or lowest stable vcore)? Bios on default and look at cpu-z? Or should I use ASUS PC Probe? Can I leave it on auto until I find my highest stable OC then reduce vcore in steps to see if it's still stable? Getting a bit confused on this one :) 
April 7, 2008 10:09:44 PM

This thread is kinda funny....If you read it for the first time from beginning to end it's like a comic strip without pictures.

I have a vivid imagination. :) 
April 8, 2008 1:56:45 PM

lol ...well since I started it, it's all good... I like to keep the reader unsuspecting of what's coming next. :) 
      • 1
      • 2 / 2
!