so... i think you should hold for the E8400 even if it isn't found on all shelves right now. It's alot cooler and gives same performance as a quad (a little more in gaming).
Regarding your VGA choice, for a 19inch screen, a 8800GT(GTS too) 512 will do just fine for the next 2-3 years.
My $0.02... The E6850 is last on the list. You should be able to find (if you're patient) the E8400 for cheaper, and it performs better. The E8400 and Q6600 are pretty close, so it would depend on whether you want short-term gaming speed, or a more general long term approach. The E8400, with it's higher clock-speed, will beat the Q6600 for single or dual-threaded type applications (including most games). The Q6600 will beat the E8400 if you have applications that use multiple threads effectively.
so... i think you should hold for the E8400 even if it isn't found on all shelves right now. It's alot cooler and gives same performance as a quad (a little more in gaming).
Regarding your VGA choice, for a 19inch screen, a 8800GT(GTS too) 512 will do just fine for the next 2-3 years.
hope this helped
So Paul you confirm that two graphic cards are of no benefit for 1280X1024 resolurion
12x10 2x/16x and medium details two 8800GTS scale above a single GTS. Now make that high details or even very high details and/or 4xaa and two cards would pull way ahead and make a real playable difference. Typically for most games, 12x10 is not a resolution where SLI can shine though as single cards do very well.
in all fairness all q6600s coming out are G0, and are so easy to put at 3 GHz - anybody can do it with a mediocre case and $40 cooler. Going with a just as fast dual core that can overclock a bit further, is just an option. the percentage gain in gaming will not hardly be seen outside of benchmarks, if you can land a quad for 199, i would do that, and spend the rest of your money upgrading video cards.