If you want the highest game framerates on the block, go for the dual core. If you want multithreaded performance and longevity, go for a quad.
I agree... but the q9300 may still lag behind a good dual like the E8400. Especially when overclocking. You may not even be able to find a quad for some time anyway.
Like mentioned though... the E8400 will beat a Q6600 in most games. Those are facts not opinions. In the future the Q6600 will beat the E8400 but not until game developers make multi threaded games (not that they dont do it now just not as much as in future).
I don't think that the q9300 will be faster for games being released during the next 18 months. So the q9300 being about 50% more expensive as the 8400 I would recommand to get the second one.
I agree.... for the price the E8400 is the best choice... as you can overclock them to 4.2 easily and 24/7 stable. I clocked mine to 4.0 and run Crysis at awesome resolutions... of course the gpu's help... that's plural!
Still both are very unavailable... but with tigerdirect selling Q9300 for 299 and the E8400 being inflated like it is... I would probably swoop on the Quad... If I could find a E8400 for 199 though that would be the better deal. As far as performance goes I dont know how much better the quad will do in the games that are out right now and that will be coming out this next year.
The E8400 is faster in present games but that speed is not seen in everyday game play when both are OC'd and the higher the resolutions the more the GPU determines frame rates. Beyond 3.2-3.4ghz the GPU becomes the bottle neck at present. The Q9300 can be a solid choice but may be FSB limited to around 3.5ghz due to it's low multi. That performance is about what a Q6600 does at 3.6ghz due to design improvements of the Q9300. This makes them about equal choices performance wise so price should be a major factor in the decision if you decide to go quad.
Message edited by Craxbax on 03-14-2008 at 12:41:29 PM
