Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Phenom instead of Intel Core2Quad Q6600 would you recommend?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 23, 2008 7:23:07 AM

I was planning to get an Intel Core2Quad Q6600 (+ 2x1GB DDR3 1800 MHZ RAM + Geforce 8800GT 512 MHz DDR3 VGA + ASUS Maximus Extreme mobo), when a friend of mine said AMD Phenom is much better.

What is the "equivalent" of AMD for Intel Core2Quad Q6600??? I might pay a little more for a better AMD than I would for the q6600, but I don't want to get in the range of Core2Extreme.
January 23, 2008 7:30:49 AM

The equivalent of AMD for Intel's Q6600 would be Phenom 9900, which runs at 2.6Ghz. With all due respect, I suspect your friend is lying. Intel's Q6600 basically beats all current Phenom hands down. It has higher performance (about 10% over 9300), while has lower power consumption, and lower heat dissipation.

Gaming benchmarks:
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/13633/5

For your system suggestion, I would recommend DDR2 over DDR3, and ASUS Maximus Formula. DDR3 currently does not have the performance gain to justify the cost (unless you do a lot of Winzipping), and the money used buying 1Gb of DDR3 would probably buy you 8Gb of DDR2 800. You won't notice a single performance difference between them.

Whatever you do, its entirely up to you. But I would advice you against both DDR3 and Phenom.
January 23, 2008 7:32:51 AM

Your friend is wrong...at least for now. Get the Q6600, you will not be disappointed.
Related resources
January 23, 2008 7:48:11 AM

your friend is an out-of-his-mind fanboy. no way any phenom will beat a core2quad right now. the quads have so much overclocking headroom anyway compared to the phenom it's not even funny. this coming from a guy who built an athlon x2 when it came out originally on socket939.

oh, and especially not if you're planning to pay MORE for the phenom than you would the core2quad!!! the phenom has some neat design philosophies, but they do not pay out.
January 23, 2008 7:56:27 AM

HAHHAHA is this a joke? Is your friends name Thunderman?
Do us a favor and hit your friend upside the head, and knock some sense into him.

the Q6600 is so much better than a measly phenom(enal piece of crap), thats its almost comical. There is no AMD equivalent to a Q6600, it beats everything AMD has.
January 23, 2008 7:59:16 AM

No contest, get the Q6600.
January 23, 2008 8:18:34 AM

lol skittle...Indeed

Omermaras: Get a q6600, even a 2.6 ghz phenom can't outperform a 2.4 q6600. Phenom's may be a "Native quad", but native doesn't mean jack **** when their architectural performance isn't up to par.

Also, if I was you, drop the asus maximum ddr3 mobo, and drop dd3 in general. It's not worth the price, you will see VERY LITTLE performance difference, yet you'd end up paying anywhere from 150-400 more for nothing. Just get a nice p35 chipset mobo, or even an X38 if you wish, but go for DDR2. pc2-800 will do fine, even pc2-533 memory would run in synch with the q6600's FSB. But no point considering how well priced ddr2-800 is. Don't let all these memory speeds fool you, they are still limited to the FSB, spending so much money on ram is a very misguided thing to do. You'd only see an increase in synthetic performance pretty much, not real world, which is where it matters.
a c 448 à CPUs
a c 111 À AMD
a c 110 å Intel
January 23, 2008 8:57:01 AM

Yeah, the Q6600 will beat the Phenom. See the following article where it's compared to the Phenom 9700:

Phenom 9700, AMD's 1st Quad-Core CPU

Here's a little preview of the upcoming Phenom 9900. Not only can it not beat the Q6600, but it also seems to consume about 100w more power when stressed than the Q6600.

AMD Phenom 9900 Processor Review - Spider Platform

Only two games are part of the preview. The Phenom 9900 only beat the Q6600 in two benchmarks:

1. Memory Bandwidth - AMD's CPUs usually beat Intel's CPUs. Only a big deal if you are running applications that deals with excessive amounts of data. Other than that it's just a footnote.

2. POV-Ray Real-Time Raytracing - Great if you are a graphic artist and POV Ray is your thing.
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2008 9:32:45 AM

Like they said ... don't listen to your friend.

a b à CPUs
January 23, 2008 10:21:14 AM

It's No Contest. Really: Get the Q~Ship.



Then once you have your system running, stop back and we'll tighten you up with a nice overclock. :sol:  Given a decent Mobo, 3.0 Ghz is there simply by setting the FSB to 333. Going a little further: 3.2Ghz on a Q6600 is almost laughably easy. 3.4Ghz (Yes, that's 47% faster clock speed than a Phe~numb) is perfectly doable with air cooling and some voltage tweaking. Further than that takes some more work, but there's a few peeps here with 3.6 or faster, though at that level you should think about water cooling to keep temperstures under control.
January 23, 2008 10:24:10 AM

I'm glad I don't have friends like that. They just sound mean. Why would they want you to suffer?
January 23, 2008 11:08:54 AM

OK Omer, listen carefully.......put down the Phenom and step away from the motherboard.....very good....now....go get a Q6600 like any right-thinking person, add some DDR2-800 with low latency, pump the FSB on your P35 or X38 MB to 375 or 380, set the vcore to 1.3875 or 1.4, and you will have a rocket fast system and you'll never look back again.
January 23, 2008 11:15:39 AM

Scotteq said:
It's No Contest. Really: Get the Q~Ship. Then once you have your system running, stop back and we'll tighten you up with a nice overclock. :sol:  Given a decent Mobo, 3.0 Ghz is there simply by setting the FSB to 333.


Get the Q6600 and think about the Abit IP 35 Pro at $149.
January 23, 2008 11:19:43 AM

Sure I'd recommend Phenom... if I worked for AMD, owned AMD stock or took pleasure in seeing others make mistakes.
January 23, 2008 11:44:56 AM

Get the Intel Q6600. The Phenom sucks.
January 23, 2008 11:59:29 AM

Is your friend a special friend?
January 23, 2008 12:02:30 PM

Get the phenom or get 6400+ or 6000+
the 6000+ have good performence and power consipstion
January 23, 2008 12:03:26 PM

Wow.

I....I....Im at a loss. Ive never seen such unanimous agreement. Must be a full moon. Wheres thunderman to defend Phenoms honor?

January 23, 2008 12:05:15 PM

sorry about the spell
Get the phenom or get 6400+ or 6000+
the 6000+ have good performance and power consumption
January 23, 2008 12:38:40 PM

Thunderman strikes again. Team Obvious defeated him in the usual way.

Q6600 >> Phenom
January 23, 2008 12:39:55 PM

KyleSTL said:
Thunderman strikes again. Team Obvious defeated him in the usual way.

Q6600 >> Phenom



:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2008 1:16:40 PM

ImajorI said:
Get the Q6600 and think about the Abit IP 35 Pro at $149.



Hell... If you look at the difference in price and buy DDR2 instead of DDR3 memory, it works out to getting a very good Motherboard and Optical Drive FOR FREE
January 23, 2008 1:30:46 PM

As posted above, the Q6600 beats the Phenom in pretty much every benchmark, plus it has a lot more potential for overclocking. I'd also go with the DDR2 RAM, as suggested above. I think your video card choice is a good one.
January 23, 2008 4:44:01 PM

I am also building a machine for 3D Studio Max, Autocad and other 3D softwares.
I want a system for at least 2.5 years, so I´m thinking quad cores.
If I choose Q6600, I´ll not be able to a major upgrade (Nehalem).
If I choose an AM2+ motherboard and a Phenom (B3) I´ll be able to upgrade with Deneb.
Overclockig is out of the equation.

I´d like some opinions..
January 23, 2008 11:32:18 PM

On average, Phenom 9900 (2.6Ghz) is about 5-10 seconds slower than Q6600 in rendering an imagine in 3Ds Max.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/13633/12



So, unless you think 5-10 seconds more for an image is not acceptable, AMD Phenom can be a good choice. I would still recommend an Intel's quad core due to its higher performance and its upgradability to faster and more efficient Yorkfield, but its entirely up to you.

The 45nm version of Phenom should arrive this year. Personally I would speculate they push the actual volume launch to 2009, with their next generation processor scheduled to come out in the same year, also speculated to push back until H2 2010, or even 2011 (AMD lowered their capital spending).
January 24, 2008 12:23:12 AM

Get the Phenom!

...if you can get it for $150.
January 24, 2008 12:06:01 PM

yomamafor1 said:
On average, Phenom 9900 (2.6Ghz) is about 5-10 seconds slower than Q6600 in rendering an imagine in 3Ds Max.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/13633/12
http://techreport.com/r.x/phenom/wb-3dsmax-dx.gif
http://techreport.com/r.x/phenom/wb-3dsmax-render.gif

So, unless you think 5-10 seconds more for an image is not acceptable, AMD Phenom can be a good choice. I would still recommend an Intel's quad core due to its higher performance and its upgradability to faster and more efficient Yorkfield, but its entirely up to you.

The 45nm version of Phenom should arrive this year. Personally I would speculate they push the actual volume launch to 2009, with their next generation processor scheduled to come out in the same year, also speculated to push back until H2 2010, or even 2011 (AMD lowered their capital spending).



Thanks yomamafor1.

5-10 seconds ain´t that much but it depends on the size of the file being rendered.
I saw those techreport benchmarks and there´s another one: Pov-Ray rendering -chess2.pov 1024x768 - AA 0.3, and the Phenom 9600 beats Q6600. What does ir mean in the "real world" of rendering?

It´s a big investiment for me and I really don´t know what to do.
Is it possible to "see" the TLB bug with 3dsMax or Maya?

January 24, 2008 12:35:36 PM

You would probably never encounter the TLB bug while rendering. The bug only affects virtualizations.

As for POV-Ray, since most rendering are floating point intensive, so this is why you see most AMD processors outperforming their Intel counterparts. IMO, it really is up to you. With AMD's current roadmap, it is unlikely that Intel would release a higher clocked part, although I also have some doubt about AMD's 45nm Phenom (Shanghai).

My recommendation would be, wait a little bit for the B3 revision of Phenom, like you said. B3 revisions should come out in March or so. If B3 revision maintain B2's performance, with higher clocks (up to 2.6Ghz), then go with a Phenom.

One thing to keep in mind: Intel's next generation architecture, codenamed Bloomfield for desktop, will probably trump AMD on its FP front. So since you would be tossing your system for a new platform in the event that you want to switch, going for a Phenom would be more logical due to their cheaper price.

I have my doubts about 45nm Phenoms, from the process node data presented in IEDM. We would probably see slightly lowered clocked 45nm Phenom at slightly reduced thermal envelop, just like AMD's initial transition from 90nm to 65nm.
January 24, 2008 1:17:22 PM

No Phenom, may it be out now or to be released, is able to even sort of keep up with Intels lowest-end QC, which is the Q6600
January 24, 2008 1:34:49 PM

Thanks again yomamafor1.

It´s nice to see some constructive ideas.

If I decide for a Phenom (B3) is it worth getting DDR2 1066?
And if it´s a Q6600, what´s the "ideal" ram?
January 24, 2008 1:38:30 PM

The Phenom needs some works,...i would wait a bit,..if yr gaming,...buy the 6400+,...its cheaper,..and will hold u up,..wait for the ati 3870 x2,....nvidia robs and is a thief! Bad,...deal compared to what's coming out! (side note) Phenom's aren't bad processors,..if u were to compare,..a 3ghz (stock) Intel QC and a AMD 3ghz (stock) QC the results would be obviously towards AMD! Never the lets,...phenom's aren't ready!
January 24, 2008 1:48:20 PM

keep it real said:
Thanks again yomamafor1.

It´s nice to see some constructive ideas.

If I decide for a Phenom (B3) is it worth getting DDR2 1066?
And if it´s a Q6600, what´s the "ideal" ram?


Phenom is very sensitive to RAM speed, so getting a DDR2 1066 will definitely bring performance up to Q6600 level in some programs.

For Q6600, DDR2-800 is suffice. Intel's CPU is insensitive to RAM speed.
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2008 1:57:29 PM

If you already had a AM2 (Phenom capable) mobo right now, I'd suggest the Phenom. But if your doing a total rebuild that could change things. The q6600 is by far the best option, espcially if you OC it, which should be done. If $ is really tight and you wanted a Quad core than the Phenom might be the option to consider. Yes the Phenom gets beat by the q6600 in just about everything, but if you consider the price difference, than that changes things. If no OC'ing is used the Phenom is a viable option, especially if $ is tight. There are other options that you could use, like a nice C2D or x2 processor.
What is your purpose of this build? What is your budget? Are you upgrading an existing system or are you building from scratch? Are you going to OC at all? All of these questions will help us define what will work best for you. The Phenom is a possible option, but only under certain situations (low budget/upgrading from AM2 mobo). The q6600 is probably the best situation for about 90% or so of Quad core setups, so just want to make sure we can recommend the best situation that we can.

P.S. The q6600 for an enthusiest is the only option right now, but for everyday applications and some special situations the Phenom is also a good option, especially if you can wait for the B3 stepping one.
January 24, 2008 2:16:48 PM

lunyone said:
If you already had a AM2 (Phenom capable) mobo right now, I'd suggest the Phenom. But if your doing a total rebuild that could change things. The q6600 is by far the best option, espcially if you OC it, which should be done. If $ is really tight and you wanted a Quad core than the Phenom might be the option to consider. Yes the Phenom gets beat by the q6600 in just about everything, but if you consider the price difference, than that changes things. If no OC'ing is used the Phenom is a viable option, especially if $ is tight. There are other options that you could use, like a nice C2D or x2 processor.
What is your purpose of this build? What is your budget? Are you upgrading an existing system or are you building from scratch? Are you going to OC at all? All of these questions will help us define what will work best for you. The Phenom is a possible option, but only under certain situations (low budget/upgrading from AM2 mobo). The q6600 is probably the best situation for about 90% or so of Quad core setups, so just want to make sure we can recommend the best situation that we can.

P.S. The q6600 for an enthusiest is the only option right now, but for everyday applications and some special situations the Phenom is also a good option, especially if you can wait for the B3 stepping one.


Hi lunyone,

As I said before, I´m building a new system for 3dsMax, Maya, Autocad.
I think I won´t overclock it as it´ll be on and stressed a lot of time. (Question: If I overclock the Q6600 to 3GHz, can it work 24/7 or will I need special cooling, etc.?)
January 24, 2008 2:28:35 PM

Q6600 at 3GHz is an easy no-risk OC with decent air cooling.
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2008 3:38:35 PM

Not sure that 24/7 at 3gig without better cooling than stock will do. I'm sure if your temps are good and solid than 24/7 shouldn't be an issue. If your not OC any than either system will do. Of coarse the q6600 will save you some time, not sure how much though. If the cost difference is enough than the Phenom would be good also. You can decide which way your going and I'm sure you'd be happy with either system. Generally I'd say a q6600 w/p35 mobo would cost you about $400 and a 9600 Phenom w/AM2+ mobo would be about $340 or so, so not sure if the $60 difference is worth it to you or not. AMD should be changing to AM3 mobo's later this year or maybe next year (about same timeframe as Intel) so I don't know if that really factors into your thoughts or not.
January 24, 2008 4:24:52 PM

There is no equivalent Phenom. Even a black edition Phenom overclocked to the max still isn't as good as a Q6600 at stock frequencies.

The only thing that AMD does have going it good pricing. Intel's are priced well, but because AMD has SLOWER processors they offer the lower models at bargain prices.

So if you have a highly threaded program and you want to save money and don't mind the TLB bug, go for Phenom.

But if you have a single threaded programs (nearly all games out there, except Crysis and a few others), and you don't want to spend a lot of cash, go for a cheap dual core from either company.
January 24, 2008 5:24:47 PM

Yes, Q6600 G0 with a P35 board. Might as well get DDR2 PC8500 so you can push it even more. My Ballistix Tracer PC8500 is stable at 1064 @ 4-4-4-12 using 2.3v. I recommend using a cooler for the ram. Benchmarks for my ram beats the DDR3.

http://www.dvhardware.net/article19063.html

Maybe in the future DDR3 will be much better than now.
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2008 5:44:25 PM

keep it real said:
Hi lunyone,

As I said before, I´m building a new system for 3dsMax, Maya, Autocad.
I think I won´t overclock it as it´ll be on and stressed a lot of time. (Question: If I overclock the Q6600 to 3GHz, can it work 24/7 or will I need special cooling, etc.?)


A Q6600 on a good motherboard will do 3GHz (1333 FSB) on stock voltages and (therefore) Temps. There is no reason a good stable overclock won't run 24/7/365.25.
January 24, 2008 5:56:30 PM

Guys,

He said overclocking was out of the question, so drop the ''but but but if you OC then you can r0x0rs the 411" garbage. Stick to helping him to identify the soulution thats right for him within the parameters he laid out.

IRT future upgradability, B3 steppings, Denab etc.
Your plan looks to future upgradebility, and that is wise, however, right now, waiting may not be such a good idea. There is no factual evidence to support the theory that the B3 stepping of Phenom will solve the problems inherent to the B2 stepping. In fact, considering AMDs "truth in advertising" record for the past 2 years Im suprised so many people would advise waiting for B3. The same holds true for Denab. There is no reason to beleive it will not be problem ridden or a no show. Conversley, it may show early and it may be a screamer right out of the gate. The simple fact is no one knows what B3 or Denab will do. Personally, I wouldnt recommend planning a system on susch large unknowns. If you can sustain yourself with a fast 90nm AM2 fX2 or some time, then that might be a good option...to buy time, but be warned that to do so predicated on the theory that B3 will perfrom as advertised is a 50/50 gamble, and if you do that, you may find yourself building a new system any way.

So what it seems to come down to is this. You can go with proven stability now through an Intel system, which will have some upgradebility down the road assuming you build on a Q6600, or you can gamble your money on a phenom/denab.
January 24, 2008 5:57:20 PM

Thanks guys,
You´re helping a lot.

TC and vagetaqtd: It´s more likely that I won´t overclock
In the benchmarks that I care (rendering) as I discussed with yomamafor1, Phenom doesn´t loose so badly
With an AM2+ mobo I´ll be able to upgrade the processor (45nm Shangai) - or not?
It´s cheaper

But my mind isn´t made up yet as I´m waiting to see B3.

So.. any suggestion will be taken seriously


January 24, 2008 5:58:23 PM

I'd suggest Q9450. 2.66 GHz, SSE4.1, Quad core, already 45nm.

Just have to wait another couple months.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
January 24, 2008 6:15:55 PM

For what it's worth, AMD claims they fixed the TLB bug in B3. Unfortunately, the source of this info is the Inquirer so I'd take it with a grain of salt.
January 24, 2008 8:12:51 PM

turpit said:
Guys,

He said overclocking was out of the question, so drop the ''but but but if you OC then you can r0x0rs the 411" garbage. Stick to helping him to identify the soulution thats right for him within the parameters he laid out.

IRT future upgradability, B3 steppings, Denab etc.
Your plan looks to future upgradebility, and that is wise, however, right now, waiting may not be such a good idea. There is no factual evidence to support the theory that the B3 stepping of Phenom will solve the problems inherent to the B2 stepping. In fact, considering AMDs "truth in advertising" record for the past 2 years Im suprised so many people would advise waiting for B3. The same holds true for Denab. There is no reason to beleive it will not be problem ridden or a no show. Conversley, it may show early and it may be a screamer right out of the gate. The simple fact is no one knows what B3 or Denab will do. Personally, I wouldnt recommend planning a system on susch large unknowns. If you can sustain yourself with a fast 90nm AM2 fX2 or some time, then that might be a good option...to buy time, but be warned that to do so predicated on the theory that B3 will perfrom as advertised is a 50/50 gamble, and if you do that, you may find yourself building a new system any way.


Thanks Turpit,
Your reply just came a little sooner than my last one.

But I think you´re right. Buying and AM2+ mobo now is beliving in AMD promises and that´s the only argument driving me away of Phenom.

I´ll stick with my system for more 2 or 3 months to see what happens and then decide.
It´s really a hard time to build a new machine.

What´s Via doing these days? :wahoo: 



So what it seems to come down to is this. You can go with proven stability now through an Intel system, which will have some upgradebility down the road assuming you build on a Q6600, or you can gamble your money on a phenom/denab.

a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
January 24, 2008 8:16:23 PM

You need to type after the [/quote] tag, not before it :) 

Upgradability: OK, I have a P35 motherboard and a Q6600, bought in July 2007. I will NOT be able to upgrade this CPU to whatever Intel releases in July 2009. TBH I am not happy with this kind of upgradability. Must admit I don't know about the AMD side, I wasn't that interested. I assume AM2 will also die in 2009, if not before.
January 24, 2008 8:55:05 PM

Rendering is highly threaded, so a Phenom wouldn't be too shabby, but I still highly recommend waiting for higher clocked B3's that are TLB bug free.

AMD fanboys will say the TLB isn't a big issue, but the fact that AMD stop shipped K10's, and canceled/delayed two Agena part because of it would say otherwise.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
January 24, 2008 9:21:58 PM

I'd say ANY processor bug is a big issue, because you can't get a fix for it. It's not like Microsoft, releasing a product with 600K known bugs and fixing 200K in each service pack :) 
January 24, 2008 10:34:40 PM

If I was using the computer in a production environment with programs that use multiple cores (I believe Maya would), then I would spend the extra on the Q6700. Especially if you don't want to overclock. Seems like it would pay for itself really quick. Your time is money.

We have AutoCAD Civil3D here at work, and it really does not benefit from multiple cores - other than multitasking. Our Autodesk sales person said they were not likely to get that going in the next release either. They are working on just getting 64bit support, which is needed. We are in the process of getting a system, and opted for a 3GHZ core 2 duo instead of the quad core. It should be faster in AutoCAD for the next few years, after which we will want a new system anyway.
January 24, 2008 11:11:47 PM

aevm said:
I'd say ANY processor bug is a big issue, because you can't get a fix for it. It's not like Microsoft, releasing a product with 600K known bugs and fixing 200K in each service pack :) 


Every processor I've ever seen has errata. However, it's much more rare for it to be serious enough to stop-ship a process shortly after a product launch in a year when you're already in the red over your head.

I think Intel's had a few recall issues in the past, but none this damning at such a bad time.
a b à CPUs
January 25, 2008 2:11:02 AM

So what if AMD fixed the bug. The bug isnt causing problems for the people that use the chip.

What B3 needs to do is clock higher.

If it all does is fix the bug then its a HUGE dissaster. At least get the orginal launch clockspeed cpus out. But they really need to get higher clocked models out.



!