Intel E8600 vs. Q9550, which is better?

[simon1980111]

Hi I recently asked about q9550 vs. q9450 for my new rig, but I've just seen the E8600 - they say it'll go for $266 (3.33ghz) and the Q9550 for $316

see here: http://www.eggxpert.com/forums/thread/324083.aspx

I'm going to be running 8gig ram, and will use it for: 6/7 int explorer pages open at once, watching dvd,s/ youtube etc, wordprocessing, and mainly want lightening fast screen load times, also will running vista (64 probably but have to check whether or not you need a 64 bit machine to run it) - just wondering what everyone thinks of these two cpu's for my situation (forgot to mention I am not into OCing yet, perhaps in the future) : )

 

[simon1980111]

any thoughts on quad core vs. x2 cores in general would be good too!

 

[iluvgillgill]

Q9550 would be better.because you run so much program at once so all the core(threads) will be used.what have been said out there is there is no ONE application that will use more then 2 cores.all is correct yet if you run multiple program you will benefit from quad core.

and you want fast load time you better turn of windows virtual memory and OC the 8GB memory of your to 1066 and you will get the lightening fast screen load time.because as all builds up on your desktop you will need a big memory bandwidth to kepp up with the task load.

 

[Ogdin]

You'll need a 64 bit OS to use 8 gigs of ram,and as for quad vs duals if you use software that uses it or you multitask like a madman a quad is nice to have.

 

[Ogdin]

And yes iluvgillgill there are single applications thats use more than 2 cores,folding@home for example will fully load a quad.

 

[sailer]

Yes, the Q9550 would be the best in this case. Yes, 64 bit hardware is needed to run a 64 bit OS. But virtually all hardware sold these days is 64 bit capable. As to the possibility of overclocking the Q9550, if it had been available when I bought my QX9650, I would have bought the Q9550 instead. The Q9550 should overclock just as fast in air cooled machines and it costs about half as much. That's a great combination in my opinion.

 

[simon1980111]

Hey thanks for that everyone, (thanks again sailer- is that your yacht, nice on if it is!), I feel like I'm on the right track now - am probably going to go Q9550, 8GIG ram, Vitsa 64, GTS880 or GTX9800 or GT9600 (not sure yet re: Vid card, will dep on price) : )

 

[wormy]

The quad core is much more future proof...although the e8600 will outperform the quad core now in the majority of tasks simply because the majority of software is not optimized for 4 cores to function simultaniously...but I cannot see buying a dual core CPU when you would plan on upgrading to a quad core in the future when software can take advantage of it because in the long run you will have spent more money by buying 2 processors....I could only recommend the e8600 if you were on a budget and the downgrade from the quadcore to the dual core kept you from compromising other parts of the computer to get within budget

 

[someguy7]

For what you said you're going to do with the machine it really doesnt matter. Sure a quad is better for multitasking but I dont consider having 7 IE windows opening with youtube or a dvd playing heavy multitasking. That wont even make 3.33ghz wolfdale(e8600) break a sweat. If thats all you want from your system IMO its overkill. 8gigs of ram is not needed(hard to arque though cause ddr2 is cheap). Also your videocards are overkill. You do not need that kind of card for regular office work(ie, word processing,youtube)

 

[shadowthor]

The Q9550 is better for video encoding and if you do a lot of stuff that requires encoding, etc. The E8600 is better for gaming.

 

[simon1980111]

Thanks all, the difference in price between the 8600 & 9550 apparently will drop fairly soon to $70 or so, (I'll probbaly wait for it), I think it makes sense to stick with quad core - especially seen as the Q9550 (from what everyones) said should easily handle what I need ghz for (plus its got the extra two cores for only $70/80 more in Q3), thanks everyone, I'm now very happy with the Q9550 as the way to go as opposed to the E8600!

 

[fps_dean]

For gaming, the e8600 for the most part will be better for the next couple of years at the very least.

For video editing / multitasking, the Q9550

So for your needs, the Q9550 would be an absolute powerhouse.