Q6600 system vs AMD Phenom system

I think a moderate 775 motherboard + Q6600 is cheaper than a similarly moderate AM2 motherboard + Phenom, and both systems use same 1066 RAM. For example:

AMD system:

motherboard : Gigabyte GA-MA770-DS3 AMD 770 (Socket AM2) PCI-Express DDR2 Motherboard ----------- 55 pounds
CPU : AMD Phenom X4 Quad Core 9750 2.40GHz (Socket AM2) - Retail ------------------------------------------- 141 pounds

total: 196 pounds

Intel system:

motherboard : Gigabyte GA-EP35-DS3 Intel P35 (Socket 775) PCI-Express DDR2 Motherboard ------------- 67 pounds
CPU : Intel Core 2 Quad Pro Q6600 "Energy Efficient SLACR 95W Edition" 2.40GHz (1066FSB) - Retail ---- 124 pounds

total: 191 pounds


******************************


It appears the Intel system is slightly cheaper than the AMD system but moreover, at the stock frequency of 2.4 GHz the Intel quad is quicker than the Phenom (and it overclocks much better).


Am I right on the above or am I missing something?

You are correct there. The only phenom that can even remotely compete with the Q6600 in most applications is the 9850 with both at stock clocks (the 9850 is still slower in most benchmarks, but it's not too far off), not the 9750, and as soon as you OC the Q6600, it leaves any current phenom in the dust.

Why would you want an AMD 770 board anyways? That chipset is junk. Only one worth getting is the 790FX or 780G.
And the last I saw in the US, the dollar difference between the 9750 and Q6600 is $15, not 20 pounds (~$40).
I guess AMD systems are way overpriced there...

You are correct and everyone knows it. That Q6600/EP35-DS3 will OC to 3G with no voltage increase. All you do is lock the PCIe to 100 and raise the FSB to 333, then set the RAM multi to 2 or 2.4 (Gigabyte setting, it's really 1:1 or 5:6 multi) depending on 667 or 800 and you are done. It's the easiest OC in history. Do yourself a favor and get a heatsink/fan that has a backing plate.

800mhz modules will limit you to 3.6ghz without even overclocking the ram (at 1:1) - check my sig

140w TDP @ 2.6ghz!

This is so confusing. OK.

Q6600 runs with FSB at 333MHz - which is then described as "1333MHz" (so we multiply the real frequency by 4) but this "1333MHz" rating is meaningless? I mean how can I use the "1333 MHz" to find out what RAM I need?

Internally the Q6600 multiplies the 333MHz by 7-ish to achieve the 2.4GHz? And I presume we are free to change the multiplier to anything we wish until the CPU does not work anymore?

Additionally, the motherboard (or is it the north bridge?) takes the FSB 333 MHz and divides it by something to derive the 100 MHz for the PCIe clock as well as the 33MHz for the PCI slots. Therefore if we overclock by increasing the FSB we are also upsetting a whole range of peripherals, right?

Finally the CPU/ North Bridge needs to talk to RAM, and for that it uses the FSB frequency, in this case 333 MHz ? So I simply need 333 MHz RAM which is branded as PC2-5300 (667 MHz) ??? Unless I plan to overclock the FSB in which case I can get PC2-6400 (800MHz) ?

I think you've about got it take the base FSB clock say 333 and multiply x4 = 1333 FSB cause the FSB is quad pumped. the 1333 isn't meaningless, just meaningless when calculating the memory and cpu speed. Take the base FSB clock say 333 and multiply x2 to get the memory u need to run at 1:1 which would be 667.

My FSB is clocked at 400 which means 1600 is my FSB, I need DDR2 800 for (1:1), and my E6400 proc which has a multiplier of x8 runs at 3.2GHz.

It is two different processors built for different tasks. If you are going to compare the phenom with a intel then a better comparison would be the next Nehalem, those are very similar processors.
AMD is built to scale, intels (core) is built to run one single thread as fast as possible. Quad’s are just two duals glued together.
It is much more complicated to build a processor for scaling, it isn’t possible to create a processor that can work faster running single threaded applications faster than one processor built for that purpose.
Some multithreaded applications is fast on intel, if each thread works as one single thread (don’t talk to other threads and is big) in the multithreaded application.

You don't need to overclock one AMD, you need to overclock Intel.

Intel has a slow FSB that handles all memory traffic and all I/O traffic.
Phenom has Hypertransport 3.0 for I/O (~20 GB/s and it doesn't need to handle memory)
The FSB on intel is about ~10 GB/s, and it isn't that effective

Are you looking for a flame war by spreading this BS, or do you just not have a clue?

Not all of it, by the way, there are shreds of truth in what you say, but your conclusions and many of your facts are BS.

Clearly you are an AMD drone.

Don't get me wrong AMD has some good stuff coming down the pike, but the Phenom is clearly not the best choice against a Q6600 @ 3G.

Hey, how are you doing? I agree, I usually expect that they are started by TROLLs but this OP seemed genuine. I figured someone would come along and get it started though. Even most AMD fanbois have acquiesced. AMD will be back, give them a little more time.

Forgot to say Hi,sorry long time no see glad u are back to the forums

AMD phenoms are good CPUs no doubt about it, but Intel still has the leads and has better price/performance ratio but give AMD more time

Check this out AMD's Upcoming CPU/GPU Platform To Catch Up With Intel?. Lets hope they don't drop the ball.

Thanks for the link Zorg lets see how will they perform

Like the "Super RV770"?

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ATI- [...] 28629.html

Can't wait to see the benchmarks on all the new cards!

Not much of a bump in Vcore aye, you must have a good chip. I had to go higher to get 3.3, although I do have a VID of 1.3.

I know, Intel isn't going to stand still. Not to be anti competition but I hope they give AMD a little breathing room. I'm quite sure that Intel is sitting on enough stuff, that could be released very quickly, to bury AMD. I think that they realize that is not smart or the most profitable.

I completely agree

Plus, I like the idea of having a bottleneck- that way you know your next upgrade will make a noticable difference! If your system is balanced you'd need to upgrade more than one component to see an improvement.

You can show how many test as you want that messure calculation performance, as I said: Intel is faster doing calculation when the memory use is minor.

Check this test http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_q9450/, there you can see what happens on high resolutions when an average (8800GT) needs more I/O. Faster will more I/O and then the AMD scales better.
But you are RIGHT when you say that intel is better on raw processor speed.

You cannot compare Intel Q6600 price which is many many months older than AMD Phenom X4 Quad Core 9750 ofcourse it is cheaper. Somehow it is good as a complete spider platform.


Quote:
The performance results were relatively close between the QX9770 and Q9450 in this benchmark. Kind of surprising actually, considering the core clockspeed difference. The Q6600 puts up a good fight but is beaten in three of the four resolutions tested while the lone offering from AMD pulls ahead in the 1920 x 1200 resolution.

source: http://www.overclockersclub.com/re [...] 450/11.htm

Worst case scenario, within say 10% tops but that could be driver optimization/holes or pcie or platform/chipset latencies etc, and at stock speeds, which anyone buying a Q6600 doesnt bother with

Give AMD a break, with a little slack from Intel they could make a showing. Let's hope so anyway.

Sooo true.


Theo Valich... the boy who cried wolf several times.


http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inqu [...] 0-3dmark06


http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inqu [...] ret-weapon

OK, once more for the slow of thinking

The stock Q6600 requires a 266MHz clock and if we run the RAM at 1:1 with the FSB then we require a PC2-4200 module (266 * 2 = 533 MHz). However we can run the RAM at different speeds, for example I could run at 3:2 which means the CPU/FSB at 266 MHz and the RAM at 400 MHz. Is that possible? Is it down to the north bridge to allow that or the motherboard or what? And what would the advantage be? I am under the impression that you get no benefits if you run the RAM faster than the FSB. Am I right?

Secondy, since the Q6600's multiplier cannot go up, we can overclock it by increasing the FSB speed, from 266 MHz to, say, 333 MHz. That would mean that the motherboard should allow me to lock the PCIe to 100 MHz and additionally my RAM would now be 333 * 2 = 666 MHz (so that is PC2-5300). If I overclock the FSB to 400 MHz I will then need 800 MHz RAM (PC2-6400). However I could also opt to change the FSB:RAM ratio, however running the RAM slower than the FSB would not be ideal.

Have I got the above about right now?

If yes, how do I know that a particular motherboard will allow me to (a) overclock the FSB to 400 MHz and (b) lock the PCIe to 100 MHz ?

I was reading a review of the HD4870 and came across this ...



I was looking toward a 790gx but the 790fx with sb750 is very tempting ...