Q6700 justified?

monst0r

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2007
444
0
18,780
Now that the Q6700 is basically the Q6600's old price, which would you go for? I'm thinking of upgrading to one of these soon, the Q9450 won't see a price drop for a long time I'm sure, and the 10x multi is attractive. If someone has a reason for me to get the Q6600 or Q9450 instead, please post. Even though this might not look like a factor, I'll most likely being ram limited at around 450FSB.:)

EDIT:
Forgot to mention, the newer 45nm chips also have a slower cache (but more of it to compensate)
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
I guess it depends on the speed you will be hoping for. Just about all q6600s are good for 3.6.

When you get a Q6700 you do have a better chance at 3.8 or higher with one.

No matter the choice you make on the q6x00 series, make sure to try and get an OEM processor if possible!!

It's all gonna be in the VID! (VID = Luck.)

--Lupi
 

sciggy

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2008
318
0
18,780
q9450 is $299 at www.microcenter.com check it out

45nm runs much cooler and seems to oc better without an incrase to VID. I'm at 3.2 without a single tweak to any voltage. Can't say how good the Q6*00 is before increasing voltage maybe someone with experience can chime in for you on that one. 45nm also runs faster clock for clock than 65nm chips.
 

gmanvbva

Distinguished
Jun 7, 2008
75
0
18,630
Q6600 seems to be a mixed bag atm and luck of the draw.

I recently just bought 2. I can get both to 3.2 without any issue. Getting them to 3.6 has been more challenging.

If I had it to do over again, I would probably get an OEM Q6700 or Q9450.

Then again, you can't really go wrong with the Q6600 OEM at $200.

I would let your cash flow/budget be the deciding factor.

If you don't mind spending the extra $100 (or $50) on the Q9450 (or Q6700), buy it.
 

SpinachEater

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2007
1,769
0
19,810


Expand on the OEM comment...I haven't heard of this before.
 

gmanvbva

Distinguished
Jun 7, 2008
75
0
18,630
Me either, Although I just bought two Q6600's

One is a L808 batch (OEM) and the other is a L804 batch (Retail).

The L808 is supposed to OC better and has a lower VID (1.225 vs 1.325).

Coincidence (OEM vs Retail)? I have no idea at this point.
 

sailer

Splendid
The Q6700 has dropped enough in price that for a person who is making a new build and doesn't have a lot of money, its a great choice. The Q9450 has been a bit disappointing from what I've seen so far, at least in the overclocking arena. The Q9550 beats is soundly, but cost a bunch more. For budget builders, I think the Q6700 is a great buy right now.
 

Evilonigiri

Splendid
Jun 8, 2007
4,381
0
22,780
True indeed, but is that extra multiplier really necessary? Most motherboards can do 450Mhz these days, and 450 x 9 = 4050Mhz, which I'm assuming not many people do. Thus, save a little and go for the Q6600.

However, there is OCing to consider. Does the Q6700 OC better than the Q6600? According to Lupi, he said the Q6700 has a better chance at 3.8GHz, so it all boils down the the OP.
 

monst0r

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2007
444
0
18,780

Right, except I would be upgrading my current E6300 (keep that in mind). The Q9xxx series I'm sure will eventually be the same value items as the Q6xxx series, but that will be later than my time frame (before September hopefully :S)

True indeed, but is that extra multiplier really necessary? Most motherboards can do 450Mhz these days, and 450 x 9 = 4050Mhz, which I'm assuming not many people do. Thus, save a little and go for the Q6600.

However, there is OCing to consider. Does the Q6700 OC better than the Q6600? According to Lupi, he said the Q6700 has a better chance at 3.8GHz, so it all boils down the the OP.
This is true, but for 24/7 operation (and having 2 sticks of budget ram that need 2.1v for >800MHz), I would like to leave the FSB around 400 or less (It's 400 right now :p). For a realistic number I'm trying to pull off, I would like about 3.6-3.8GHz. Keep in mind I do have a TRUE, and some sexy arse cooling in general ;].

P.S. If anyone has any advice on where to fine low VID CPUs, please do share
 

Verillion

Distinguished
Jun 12, 2008
28
0
18,530
The VID is the "stock" vCore for each chip, and it varies from chip to chip based on Intel's testing procedures. The VID will tell the motherboard: "This is the voltage I require at stock speeds when the VCore setting is on 'Auto' for proper operation." Nothing more. It is said that a lower VID value will yield better overclocks, but nothing's been conclusively proven.

If anyone can share ANYWHERE that lower VID=more oc, I'd love to see it..... but from where I stand it all is just a tube made myth.
 

gmanvbva

Distinguished
Jun 7, 2008
75
0
18,630
Well... reading ALL of the OCing threads/boards, it seems fairly apparent that there is (at the very least) a loose correlation between the documented VID and the ability to OC a CPU.

A low VID doesn't guarantee 3.6, 3.8, 4.1, etc. because there are many other factors that come into play as well? RAM, MB, Cooling, etc...
 

monst0r

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2007
444
0
18,780
Yes guys, I know what a VID is :]

Sorry, let me rephrase my question... Does anyone know where you have a high probable chance of getting a low VID chip, or store of sorts? Thanks.
 

shadowthor

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2008
1,128
0
19,280
Your best bet, is to look at xtremesystems.org, they have a Q6600 overclocking thread there, and most ppl, list what batch they got and what the VID was.
 

monst0r

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2007
444
0
18,780

+1 for quality info, thanks. :)
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
Sorry, I meant that OEM chips have a "better" chance at being low VID, because intel MAY not have rooted through the low VIDs and re branded them a higher speed.

IE... OEM's may have purchased a bunch of the chips over a year ago. Since intel has just recently started doing the rummage through VID thing, if you get a chip that an OEM aquired a year ago, it may be better than all the 1.3000s that have been pouring out of retail Boxes, thats all.

--Lupi
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
After actually reading. It's quite simple. VID = The biggest OC boost. Believe it, you get much better OCs from low VIDs than high ones.

I am the one who did the research myself on 10 different chips. I know. I use my 1.2000 VID q6600 to bypass the natural noisy-ness of NVidia chipsets, as well as the Vdrop and droop.

Anyone else running 3.6 Ghz on an NVidia chipset with a q6600 at 1.312 Loaded?

You think a 1.3000 VID that needs 1.43 volts loaded is gonna OC better than the lower one?

I mean, read and use common sense! Look around you. All the trouble is from the high VIDs, because people are scared of Voltage! Not to mention the higher the VID, the more VCore needed, the more Heat it makes, the less efficient it becomes, it creates more interference within the chipset for supporting a higher VCore. (usually only seen on NVidia junk.)

So believe me, your VID will make alot of difference. I have plenty of processors that I have tested this on. 1.2000, 1.2500, 1.2625, 1.2750, 1.3000, 1.3125, 1.3250. That was my VID range from my testing on my chips.

And look at the other guys results... a OEM vs Retail. The OEM chip he has will reach 3.6 at 1.34 volts loaded!!

His other a.3250 will need 1.45ish. Owww!

See any difference? Now when you have a huge vdrop and droop, that Low VID will play GOD! Could you imagine what I would need on an NVidia chipset? I need 1.4000 to get 1.312 Loaded, with Droop disabled! It still has a .08ish VDrop!!!

If I had a 1.3000 VID chip, I'd need 1.5750 in the Bios to get my 1.43-.44 loaded!! And as you may not be aware, higher VCore causes other problems!

--Lupi

 

Evilonigiri

Splendid
Jun 8, 2007
4,381
0
22,780

He's getting it for the extra multiplier. He does not want to exceed 400MHz FSB and is attempting 3.6GHz-3.8GHz. So naturally that extra, what, $50? may be worth it to him.
 

monst0r

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2007
444
0
18,780

Plus the extra chance at getting that all important lower VID. :p
Thanks all for the input, once I get the money I'll take into all this into consideration.
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
Bah, my 1.2375 VID q6700 was stable for 9 hours at 3.95 @ 1.53 volts loaded.

It's what I used to get 1st place in the CPU overclock competition!

So it can most assuredly over clock higher than the Q6600.

--Lupi
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
Based on Luck Of The Draw, with the VID. OEM, fair warning. And hope its an older q6700 thats been in a warehouse, and they decided to sell, and not use in an OEM system.

So I wish you happy VID hunting.

No, there is no way to tell from the box or outside of the chip, hehehe!

--Lupi
 

shadowthor

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2008
1,128
0
19,280
Maybe, its time, we complied a list of batch numbers that have been know to have certain vid, at least ppl can have a chance avoiding the highest vid, although its still the luck of the draw.