Q6600 vs. Q9450

This might seem like a redundant question, but what exactly is SSE4, and what impact does/will it have on games?

Do you think there will be a big difference between the current Q6600 and the upcoming Q9450? I ask because I really want to build up a system now, so I can play games now, but the 9450 is only about a month away. It will cost more, though....

Would the wait really be worth it, or will an OCed Q6600 serve me well over the next year or so?

Given that the Q9450 costs $316 each to retailers, I can only imagine they are going to go for around $400, perhaps even more. Also, the 8x multiplier would necessitate a $300 mobo, as the Foxconn (the cheapest x38) only OCs to around 430. Considering the fact that I don't do anything but game with my Windows box, I doubt I'll need the extra SSE4 stuff.

Putting everything in perspective, it seems like I'd be fine with a Q6600. With one of those OCed to around 3.4GHz, I doubt I'll be CPU bound for at least a year or so. I've been waiting a long time to get back in the games, and I don't think I can justify waiting an extra month, only to pay at least $200 more for questionable gains.

hmm, i would wait, unless you have to, for 2 reason

umm... what are the reasons?

Drudge: That was pretty much my mentality going into this. However, I've realized that the higher overclockability, higher cache, and SSE4 is worth the wait. Penryn/Yorkfield/whatever it's called, is quite a step up from Kentsfield from a number of stand points. Plus, I actually have some valid reasons for waiting that go beyond the desire for faster hardware. If this was just an incremental upgrade (ie: the difference between the Q6600 and the Q6700), I wouldn't hold by breath. However, we're on the cusp of a major update.

I'll put it this way: I'm building up a system mid-January, Q9450 or not.

minor as compared to oc of a q6600 at low fsb vs the high fsb needed for the 45nm chips.

make sure you can clock over the 3.6ghz sweet spot

if you mobo can run high fsb of 450-550 stick with the q6600

I'm in a similar situation as the poster. Sold my old DS3, RAM and GPU with a promise of my chip in Jan when the Q9450's came out but now with the delay and the hassle i'm getting i don't know weather to plump for the q6600 and get him off my back or hang on for the Q940 and hope it comes in Feb. 12 meg of L2 Cash and the promise of lower temps certainly sounding good to me for the slight price increase, even if it does come with an 8x muliplyer the lower temps should counter balance that surly?

In the end, I went with a Q6600. Really do not feel like waiting for what will most likely amount to marginal speed gains. I'm at 3.6 GHz @ 1.45v stable, 67*C hottest core, full load. I could probably push it to 3.7 or 3.8 stable on air, but I'm not one to brush up against the ceiling.

After a lot of research, it seems like the difference in real world performance between a Q6600 and a Q9450 would not be that huge. Essentially, if person A had a Q6600 and person B had a Q9450, both of them would end up replacing their chips at around the same time.