q6600, still cheaper, G0 clocks great (3ghz is a switch from 266 to 333 FSB only) I have had mine running at 3.6 on water to benchmark, but typically I run it at 3.42 99% of the time for games, surfing, etc, etc. DD2-800/1066 will help you get over the 3.0ghz hump if you are curious.
I am in the same situation now and i am confused about buying q6600 or q6700 ..
i will use ThermalRight Ultra-120 Extreme and i will add as manay fans as i can in my ThermalTake armor+ for proper air cooling ...
my rig will basicly be 8GB DDR2 1066 ( G-Skill or Corsair Dominator ) + XFX 780i Mobo + XFX 9800 GX2 ...
I want to get the maximum overclocking i can .. As a game artist i work all the time with 3D and 2D apps like 3DsMax and Photoshop as well as extreme gaming ..
So which is better overclocker and how far it can go in speed .. Q6700 or Q6600
This my 1st build so iam kinda noobi .sry
I am a noob and have been reading this forum for months now as I get close to building my first system. I've been convinced that the Q6600 is/was the way to go, but wondered why the Q6700 wasn't mentioned more with the price drop being anticipated. Yesterday I found the Q6700 cheaper at Tiger than the Q6600 price I just saw flashed on the top of one of this forums screens. All things being equal, including price, isn't the Q6700 the better processor? If not why? It's faster, has a 10 multiplier and the G0 stepping! Tiger has the Q6700 for $259... here is the link I found yesterday on another forum:
Q6700 would be a better CPU because of the higher Multi. One con would be the cooling if your thinking about OC'ing the most out of it. And if your not really using a good MB for OC'ing, then its going to do as good as the Q6600, for a higher price.
However, Q6600 would be the best Quad price/performance wise (with OC in mind), in my opinion.
If you're planning on buying a good MB, which can attain a 1600 FSB, what does that do to the comparison? With the Q6700's 10 mult and faster default speed... that has to be worth a minor difference in price. The difference between the Q6600 at Newegg ($229.99) and the Q6700 at TigerDirect ($259.99) is only $30. A few days ago the Q6700 was about double the price of the Q6600... Intel must have thought it was better for some reason. I'm not the only one wondering if a minor price difference makes the Q6700 a better choice.
Intel must have thought it was better for some reason. I'm not the only one wondering if a minor price difference makes the Q6700 a better choice.
It's basically called marketing. And most people would fall under that without knowing that you can achieve better performance of the same chip, namely OC'ing.
So Intel/AMD can make different margins of money when you have stock speeds that the majority of people who don't know much about OC'ing. That is the only reason for Intel making prices higher on faster stock models.
Now another thing, if you were to want to OC to for say 3.6ghz tops... which would you choose... Q6600 or Q6700? Well.. they are going to perform the same. However, if you want to OC allot further with the right amount of cooling, then the Q6700 will have a lil edge.
Your last comment focuses on what I wonder the most about... How much potential the Q6700 has. Being that the Q6700 starts off with a slight edge over the Q6600, does that imply that at 3.6ghz the Q6700 might run a bit cooler than the Q6600 (both having equally good air cooling)?
Please forgive this NOOB for asking so many questions... I'm doing my homework, so when I ask this forum to evaluate my build, you'll all know I made an effort to make good choices.
Looking at the links above the Q6600 has a speed of 2.40GHz and the Q6700 speed is 2.66GHz. So, to OC the Q6700, it starts out .2 GHz faster than the Q6600 and has the 10 mult. Does the 10 mult help the Q6700 to have lower voltages to attain the same speeds as the Q6600... Assuming we're only trying to OC to 3.6GHz.
Well... The only difference between the 2 are the multipliers. So in OC'ing, the Q6700 can give you a lil boose:
Q6700 is rated 1066FSB (4x266=1066), rated speed (10x266=2.66ghz)
Q6600 is rated 1066FSB(4x266=1066), rated speed (9x266=2.4ghz)
So if you bump the FSB to say 300
So the difference in that speed adjustment, the 6700 is 300mhz faster.
But to match 3.60ghz:
FSB 360 x 10 = 3.60ghz
FSB 400 x 9 = 3.60ghz
When you push the FSB to 400, and your using DDR2800 memory, your actually useing the full advertised speed of DDR2800 memory, while the 6700 would run it slower, but then its easier on the MB. So you do have different pro's con's when you look at the nitty gritty.