Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Advice needed, all fanboys stay away

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 21, 2008 9:39:14 AM

Hi all,

I'm a long time reader but I registered recently to post and I have been wanting to build a new computer for a while but, my wallet and time have been tight. College :cry: 
But since my laptop died :fou:  I think its time! SO! I'm currently building a new PC :love:  but I have ran into a problem:

I do alot of circuit analysis, circuit simulation, 3d rendering, 3d design and drafting, and some photoshop so a quad core is a must.

I know that the q6600 is a wonderful quad with a large amount of potential. I plan to pair it with a P43 chipset and OC to 3 GHZ but the price of the two combined is at least $270.

There is also the 9600 x4 phenom which I know is not as powerful, but I can pair it with a 790GX chipset w/ a 750 SB so 3 GHZ seems reachable (doubt) also, the chipset also offers 2x pcie 2.0 slots for cf all for about $220

I don't upgrade my computer very often, maybe the GPU once a year and the CPU maybe once every two to three years depending on if chipsets change. I'm a pretty casual gamer so the cf is quite appealing, but I know nothing can compensate for a poor CPU.

I know the LGA 775 is at the end of its life so upgrading it 3 years from now is out of the question, But I might upgrade sooner depending on the prices drops of the yorkfields. To my understanding though, the AM2+ socket can be used for an AM3 CPU which I'm sure will be bottlenecked a bit by it. But honestly I think Deneb will be priced well and drop well or I could pick up a mid ranged AM3 CPU if the price is right. The option of cf is nice will offer my graphics more life for a lower cost but seriously. I am aware of the scaling issues but I'm not too worried. I come from 10x7(1040x720) so 14x9 and 12x10 is huge to me, 16x10 is honestly a luxury. I have never used AA and AF due to GPU limits. HELL I played COD4 in 6x4 all settings on LOW and loved it! Must be the gameplay. :sol: 

I know theres no such thing as futureproof so I won't dare use that phrase, but which build path would be better for me in the long run? There also the factor that I need this system by the first week of September. So waiting for Deneb or Nehalem is completely out of the question. Also my budget is so tight due to college tuition. Regardless if which I choose it will be a quantum leap from my older desktop:

Athlon XP
x700 pro
1 gb of ram
160gb

Okay, now that your finished w/ your little ROFL after seeing that eye sore.

I'm trying to keep a whole set up under $1k so far I have:

Case -> Antec Three Hundred
PSU -> Antec earthWatt 500W

total = $103

Still need after this thread:

GPU -> ATI 4850
RAM -> 2 x 2gb
HDD -> 500gb
CD/DVD burner -> lite-on
Monitor -> whatever looks good for $200ish
Keyboard -> whatever is left, leaning towards saitek ecllipse 2 or even an OCZ elixir, new G15 makes me sad, G11 too big

So advice on CPU + MoBo to choose thanks.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on any facts or assumptions.
Comments and Suggestions are always welcomed btw.

Thanks in advance.
a b à CPUs
August 21, 2008 11:08:56 AM

Both Intel and AMD setups you suggested are good, but, as you said, the AMD processor isn't as "powerful". Moreover, AM3 compatibility, even if possible, is up to the manufacturer; if they don't release a BIOS for AM3 processors, no support ... same problem happened going from AM2 to AM2+. Therefore, since you want to be able to upgrade a few years from now, I would suggest going Intel. Get the Q6600 with any good P35/P43/P45 board, something like the EP45-DS3L would be good.
August 21, 2008 11:19:28 AM

I agree with Zenthar, but thing is in the next 3 years many changes will come. As usual 3 years is just too big of time frame. Getting a AM3 mobo might seem the best shot, but i dont know if they are in the market up to September. Socket 775 doesn't seem to me a like sure shot, because it is reaching EOL.

I would probably wait for AM3 (or certified AM3 compatible boards) and then buy the mobo. But im biased on this case, because i don't like to shell out too much money for a CPU and although that Q6600 is cheap, i might turn to a Phenom 9600BE or a 9850BE part that is reaching a good price also.

As for the rest, good build.
Related resources
August 21, 2008 12:31:54 PM

Intel is still streaks ahead of AMD. Do you really think that C2D will be totally out-of-date in a year or even 2 years? Nehalem wont be in full production for desktops until 2009 H2, so i wouldnt worry about that.
Sometimes you just have to dip into the market when you really want that new computer, regardless of "whats just around the corner"

Good Luck with your build
a c 123 à CPUs
August 21, 2008 1:19:18 PM

Have to agree with Hixy, although in your case it will be C2Q.
For the RAM, avoid potential headaches by getting DDR2-800 RAM that will run at the JEDEC standard 1.8V. Mushkin has some, like this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168..., although it is out of stock at the moment (until 8/25).
If you're going to do Crossfire at some point, you'll need a beefier PSU, probably 650W-750W. Quite frankly, I don't think you'll need it.
a c 126 à CPUs
August 21, 2008 1:25:34 PM

Unless you plan on heavy gaming at high res such as 1680x1050 or higher then you wont ever truly need to crossfire and a single GPU will be fine for normal gaming.

I would say go with the Q6600 as the Phenom you listed is a older B2 stepping and they didn't have the best rep in OCing where as the Q6600 has built its rep based on the fact that it can and will 99% of the time OC to 3GHz without even trying.
August 21, 2008 1:55:05 PM

jimmysmitty said:
Unless you plan on heavy gaming at high res such as 1680x1050 or higher then you wont ever truly need to crossfire and a single GPU will be fine for normal gaming.

I would say go with the Q6600 as the Phenom you listed is a older B2 stepping and they didn't have the best rep in OCing where as the Q6600 has built its rep based on the fact that it can and will 99% of the time OC to 3GHz without even trying.


If you plan on OCing a Phenom, be sure to at least get one with the x50 extension to ensure the stepping.
The original B2s do not OC well at all and run very hot.

Also, even if you upgrade to Denab I suspect you will be hard pressed to beat an OC'd Q6600 on an AM2+ board. (If you need the Upgrade Performance, just add a decent CPU cooler to take the OC from 3.0 to (3.4-3.6)

You can get a lower end P45 XFire Board for about an Extra $20-$30, but that will also mean a better PSU.
It will also likely require a case with even better cooling since the 4850s do not exhaust the hot air out of the case.

August 21, 2008 2:15:14 PM

Intel overclocks much better than amd, but amd is 20% faster at stock for rendering under mental ray. If you use your CPU a lot for rendering in this renderer, amd is probably the better choice for under 3ghz.


However, you can oc c2q6600 to 3.2 or even 3.6 with relative ease and 50$ heatsink and I think the speed improvement is totally worth it.

2x2gb of ddr2 pc800 ram is the most sensible amount of ram

500w is too much and antec 300 is not enough.

Get antec 900 if you want lound and antec or coolermaster 690 if you want more silent and cooler-master :p 

4850 is terrific choice. I’d get an after market cooler for it too.

Best monitor you can get in 22” range is asus vw222u its 200e, so it should be ~250$. It’s the one I’d get.

Good luck :) 
a b à CPUs
August 21, 2008 2:23:05 PM

I have a Q6600 oc'ed @3.4 , 750i board, 8800GT and 2gigs of HyperX 6400

This setup should last me quite a while, and though I am stuck without X-fire, I could just get a 4870x2 if need be. This thing will last for at least a couple years, esp. as I only have a 1680x1050 monitor.

It cost me £450 from scratch (excluding HD's) with a modular 800W PSU, well ventilated case (4x 150mm fans, 1 front, 1 rear, 2 side) aftermarket cooler, thermal compound, the works.

I cannot foresee a 3.4 Ghz Quad and 4870x2 being laughed at in the next 2-3 years, so I am going ahead and saying it, IT'S FUTUREPROOF.

There is no real issue about the phenoms. I just chose SLI instead of X-fire (d'oh), and intel for the Oc'ability.

If you like AMD do them a favour and get an entirely amd system. I actually like them but couldn't resist the promise of better value on my quad.

August 21, 2008 2:26:46 PM

I have the 4850 and it's a lovely card. Go with the intel setup. By the time you feel the need to upgrade (two/three years?) BOTH sockets will most likely be obsolete.

EDIT: Then you can do what I do which is slap in more ram and a better gpu and hdd and you're good to go for another year :D 
August 21, 2008 2:31:59 PM

+1 to the 4850
+1 2x2gb ddr2 800
+1 q6600
hdd i would go with wd 640 gb for $85. price per gb can't be beat
mobo you have some options. for a 1k build the p43 is a good choice.

this will allow you to be productive for a while. allow some ability to upgrade. p45 would allow crossfire on x8/x8 but it costs quite a bit more. and with the p43 you could still move up to the 4870x2 at some point (or the next good single card) and still function very very well.

these options should leave a little room for a good heatsink for your OC.
a c 159 à CPUs
August 21, 2008 2:39:44 PM

In spite of what forum members say, I would recommend a standard pc if funds are tight. Dell has a quad core q6600 pc for about $399 listed on fatwallet. You can upgrade the power supply if needed for around $50, and get a decent video card for around $100. I got my compaq pc for $199 at Fry's anniversary sale; put in a better power supply (free, I have numerous spares), and found a dual core cpu for $60 online. Total cost less than $300 with $15 newegg heatsink. I was looking forward to using a p45 board, but my free board was almost doa. I got it to post a few times, but the manufacturer wouldn't replace it as it was a promotional item. Replaced it with a $20 ecs board from Fry's electronics, and my spare pc is completed. Under no circumstances would I spend more than about $100 for the motherboard, no matter how pretty or how many standard features it has. I've had a bad board ocassionally from all the big board makers.
August 21, 2008 2:53:04 PM

The Q6600 rig is surely a good setup, however, based on statements like "I don't upgrade very often", I wouldn't recommend it based just on its OC headroom. From what I have read I think you need performance, but you also need stability above that. No matter how many people say that you'll take that thing into 3.0 ghz realm with ease: OC can't be predicted and even if you manage to do that you will still put your system's stability at risk. There's not such a thing as "completely stable OC for 24/7 operation" (EDIT: and I'm not talking about the Q6600 but about any CPU). Your system may fail 5 minutes after 48 hours of Prime, while browsing the web.

Since you're pretty much a casual gamer I guess the 790GX would serve you better than Intel's chipsets. Considering that it has PCIex 2.0 and can also run in HybridCrossfire (the list of compatible cards will probably improve) I think it's such a great deal. That and a Phenom X4 9850 or 9750 would be a great combo (CPUs without a "50" in the end are a no-no because of the TLB bug).

Regarding the upgrade path: I have a $60 AM2 moob that can support even the latest Phenoms (just the 95W ones - at least "officially" -, but there are tests with the 125W ones too). It's a Foxconn mobo, so, I would get a little more feedback in the forums regarding the manufacturers that have updated their AM2 BIOS in order to support the new CPUs.

Personally, I would get that AMD combination, pair it with 4 GBs of low latency DDR2 800, Vista x64 and there it is. But keep in mind that the Q6600 is *awesome* too. But I don't think it would be *THAT* worth in your case. Performance-wise you probably wouldn't feel much of a difference, since Phenom does quite well in multi-threaded applications.
August 21, 2008 3:11:13 PM

Quad core is not good for 24/7 operation I suggest dual cores or Phenom has more advance power saving compared to old Q6600 model, since it can be able to under clock each core independently but its according to paper.

Intel chipsets are power hungry chipsets so as nvidia, though Im using nvidia lols, no choice since I like XFX and hybrid setup though not promising so much.

My next hybrid upgrade would be Geforce 9800GT Hybridpower, I dont like GTX since it is so power hungry, I dont play much games only warcraft.

Hybrid setup in ATI is confusing or less options unlike in Nvidia.
August 21, 2008 3:19:43 PM

i would chose a intel core2 duo or quad and a ati 4870.

this is because its better than the competition for the price and they will give you enough performance to do what you need.
August 21, 2008 5:03:19 PM

dattimr said:
The Q6600 rig is surely a good setup, however, based on statements like "I don't upgrade very often", I wouldn't recommend it based just on its OC headroom. From what I have read I think you need performance, but you also need stability above that. No matter how many people say that you'll take that thing into 3.0 ghz realm with ease: OC can't be predicted and even if you manage to do that you will still put your system's stability at risk. There's not such a thing as "completely stable OC for 24/7 operation". Your system may fail 5 minutes after 48 hours of Prime, while browsing the web.

however, you MAY get a bad chip that fails during web browsing on stock - it is simply very unlikely
August 21, 2008 5:12:50 PM

azkyte said:
Hi all,

I'm a long time reader but I registered recently to post and I have been wanting to build a new computer for a while but, my wallet and time have been tight. College :cry: 
But since my laptop died :fou:  I think its time! SO! I'm currently building a new PC :love:  but I have ran into a problem:

I do alot of circuit analysis, circuit simulation, 3d rendering, 3d design and drafting, and some photoshop so a quad core is a must.

I know that the q6600 is a wonderful quad with a large amount of potential. I plan to pair it with a P43 chipset and OC to 3 GHZ but the price of the two combined is at least $270.

There is also the 9600 x4 phenom which I know is not as powerful, but I can pair it with a 790GX chipset w/ a 750 SB so 3 GHZ seems reachable (doubt) also, the chipset also offers 2x pcie 2.0 slots for cf all for about $220

I don't upgrade my computer very often, maybe the GPU once a year and the CPU maybe once every two to three years depending on if chipsets change. I'm a pretty casual gamer so the cf is quite appealing, but I know nothing can compensate for a poor CPU.

I know the LGA 775 is at the end of its life so upgrading it 3 years from now is out of the question, But I might upgrade sooner depending on the prices drops of the yorkfields. To my understanding though, the AM2+ socket can be used for an AM3 CPU which I'm sure will be bottlenecked a bit by it. But honestly I think Deneb will be priced well and drop well or I could pick up a mid ranged AM3 CPU if the price is right. The option of cf is nice will offer my graphics more life for a lower cost but seriously. I am aware of the scaling issues but I'm not too worried. I come from 10x7(1040x720) so 14x9 and 12x10 is huge to me, 16x10 is honestly a luxury. I have never used AA and AF due to GPU limits. HELL I played COD4 in 6x4 all settings on LOW and loved it! Must be the gameplay. :sol: 

I know theres no such thing as futureproof so I won't dare use that phrase, but which build path would be better for me in the long run? There also the factor that I need this system by the first week of September. So waiting for Deneb or Nehalem is completely out of the question. Also my budget is so tight due to college tuition. Regardless if which I choose it will be a quantum leap from my older desktop:

Athlon XP
x700 pro
1 gb of ram
160gb

Okay, now that your finished w/ your little ROFL after seeing that eye sore.

I'm trying to keep a whole set up under $1k so far I have:

Case -> Antec Three Hundred
PSU -> Antec earthWatt 500W

total = $103

Still need after this thread:

GPU -> ATI 4850
RAM -> 2 x 2gb
HDD -> 500gb
CD/DVD burner -> lite-on
Monitor -> whatever looks good for $200ish
Keyboard -> whatever is left, leaning towards saitek ecllipse 2 or even an OCZ elixir, new G15 makes me sad, G11 too big

So advice on CPU + MoBo to choose thanks.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on any facts or assumptions.
Comments and Suggestions are always welcomed btw.

Thanks in advance.




The MD solution is the most future proof in terms of new archs working in it. Unless AMD releases a new chipset, all that will be needed is a BIOS flash for existing boards to use Deneb. Of course, could always go to Penryn if it's still around.

It's really a toss up. I can't say which you shoul dget, but i can say either one will be fine for 2 years. If you can save a few bucks one way or the other that may be the deciding factor. It looks like the AMD is a little cheaper and just as powerful for the most part.
August 21, 2008 5:27:35 PM

to me, the upgrade ability in 3 years is more of a joke. you should be hold on to this rig for 3 years, and build a new rig when you have the money. "upgrade" means waste the old parts. the only thing that will have no waste is to get another same graphic card and x-fire or sli when upgrade.
August 21, 2008 6:06:06 PM

pogsnet said:
Quad core is not good for 24/7 operation I suggest dual cores or Phenom has more advance power saving compared to old Q6600 model, since it can be able to under clock each core independently but its according to paper.


What?!? Phenom Systems Use More Power.
Here is one of many rewiews to show this.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-phenom...

Mind you, this is not with the x50 Class Phenoms which are a little better, but the OP is considering the old B2 steppings since they are inexpensive.

Even the B3s which are pricer, do not save much power and that starts to put the 45nm Quads in play which would extend the difference, even against the B3s.

And, Yes, I have a Q6600 running at 3.0Ghz running as a VM Server hosting 4 other servers.
I have not restarted the sysmem for a few months. The last time was just to upgrade my UPS so I could get my monitors on the UPS system as well.

August 21, 2008 6:15:03 PM

dattimr said:
No matter how many people say that you'll take that thing into 3.0 ghz realm with ease: OC can't be predicted and even if you manage to do that you will still put your system's stability at risk. There's not such a thing as "completely stable OC for 24/7 operation". Your system may fail 5 minutes after 48 hours of Prime, while browsing the web.
I, as respectfully as possible, say total crap, misinformation, and FUD. With any decent mobo P35 or above and a decent HS the 3G OC is a no brainer. If you can't get 3G you are doing something wrong and should immediately go buy a Dell. Who does 48 hours of Prime, the insane bent on cooking their new chip? I know it was just an example, but come on. The Q6600 is absolutely rock solid for 24/7 operation. Where are you getting your information from, an AMD website? Stop spreading the BS.
a c 108 à CPUs
August 21, 2008 6:28:41 PM

Acer AL2216Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor: $200
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

As tempting as a Radeon HD4850 may be if you are a 'casual' gamer I would consider the dual slot ....

HIS Hightech H387QS512NP Radeon HD 3870 512MB 256-bit GDDR4: $129
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Three reasons ....

1) It's basically 5x your existing Radeon;
2) You can do a soft-mod on the HD38xx series to a FireGL; and
3) You can put the extra cash toward the Phenom 9850 BE / Biostar 790GX combo for $259.
August 21, 2008 7:10:06 PM

spuddyt said:
however, you MAY get a bad chip that fails during web browsing on stock - it is simply very unlikely


Indeed, but it's much more likely if it's overclocked. It's not as if I don't like overclocking at all, but he said he will probably use that PC for 2 years, so that's it. Should he bet on "luck" or can he afford having stock performance (which is damn good with whatever build he chooses)? Well, it's up to him. Just my cents.
August 21, 2008 7:20:23 PM

Zorg said:
I, as respectfully as possible, say total crap, misinformation, and FUD. With any decent mobo P35 or above and a decent HS the 3G OC is a no brainer. If you can't get 3G you are doing something wrong and should immediately go buy a Dell. Who does 48 hours of Prime, the insane bent on cooking their new chip? I know it was just an example, but come on. The Q6600 is absolutely rock solid for 24/7 operation. Where are you getting your information from, an AMD website? Stop spreading the BS.


Wow. Perhaps you totally missed the point? I'm not talking about the Q6600: I'm talking about any damned CPU. Just because some people have been running their overclocked CPUs (X2s, Phenoms, C2Ds, C2Qs and so on) for months - perhaps a year or two - doesn't mean "everyone" will make it, no matter what's the mobo, HS or the overclocker's experience. The guy said he doesn't upgrade very often (so, it's like he intends to keep this rig for 2 years) and then I say he should focus on stability. Perhaps Anandtech, THGs and every damn site is wrong and they simply should say: "Yeah, people, overclocking is ALWAYS a must, it will ALWAYS work, you will NEVER have an issue if using a good mobo, HS and these settings. Have you ever heard of a problem related to overclocking? BS! TOTAL FUD! Retarded overclocker detected. Intel and AMD don't want you to unleash their secret performance: start overclocking NOW."

Please, think a little before you post. Just because it works for you it doesn't mean it will work for everybody else. Talk to a real overclocker and ask him about the subject (since I believe you are not in this category).
August 21, 2008 7:54:11 PM

Thanks for the replys so far they have been very helpful. I appreicate all the unbiased information as well.

I notice no-one is factoring in the SB750 to the equation, am I over-hyping it?

Also I noitced the AMD solution saves me an pretty big amount of cash upfront and in the longer run when next-gen gpus come out ill just crossfire my HD 4850 and save around $100 bucks again.
(using 8800gt SLI vs HD 4870 as reference).

But still are these reason good enough justifying the dismissal of a q6600? Or am I just hyped up by the rest of the Tom's Hardware Forum's q6600 rocks all attitude?

Thanks in advance
August 21, 2008 8:20:20 PM

dattimr said:
Wow. Perhaps you totally missed the point? I'm not talking about the Q6600: I'm talking about any damned CPU.
Yeah I did, it's nice of you to add that you were referring to all CPUs, not that it matters all that much. What you may not understand is that the Q6600 @ 3G is a mild OC not some balls to the wall OC. If you were advising against 3.6G or even 3.4G, long term i.e., more than 2 years. I wouldn't disagree, but I will about a 3G.

dattimr said:
Just because some people have been running their overclocked CPUs (X2s, Phenoms, C2Ds, C2Qs and so on) for months - perhaps a year or two - doesn't mean "everyone" will make it, no matter what's the mobo, HS or the overclocker's experience.
Again you don't take the extent of the OC into consideration. An OC isn't on or off, there is a sliding scale and that scale is different for different processors. A mild OC on the Core2 CPUs was a medium, heavy, or unattainable OC on past CPUs, and some newer ones, depending on which one your talking about.

dattimr said:
The guy said he doesn't upgrade very often (so, it's like he intends to keep this rig for 2 years) and then I say he should focus on stability.
Hell, 2 years is a short period of time he could easily get away with 3.4G and it would last a lot longer than that, assuming that he was able to keep Vcore and temps at a reasonable level.

dattimr said:
Perhaps Anandtech, THGs and every damn site is wrong and they simply should say: "Yeah, people, overclocking is ALWAYS a must, it will ALWAYS work, you will NEVER have an issue if using a good mobo, HS and these settings. Have you ever heard of a problem related to overclocking? BS! TOTAL FUD! Retarded overclocker detected. Intel and AMD don't want you to unleash their secret performance: start overclocking NOW."
Ok, your starting to ramble on a little here. I can easily find you articles by the same sites you mentioned, and others, that will tout the "free" OC to 3G. Would you like links?

dattimr said:
Please, think a little before you post. Just because it works for you it doesn't mean it will work for everybody else. Talk to a real overclocker and ask him about the subject (since I believe you are not in this category).
You so funny. That is exactly what I'm trying to explain to you. You don't need to be an OCer to get the "free" 3G OC on the Q6600. It's so easy even a caveman can do it.

By the way, I have my Q6600 @ 3.2G/1600 1:1 800 with all voltages on auto except RAM @ 2.2V. My Prime95 small FFT temps are 56,56,54,54 with an ambient of ~72F. CPU-Z load Vcore is 1.264V and VID is 1.3V, which is not one of the lower ones. I have screen shots if you need them.

It is 24/7 stable and I have no concerns that it will last at least 5 years. If it's not taxed by anything I want to do, then I plan on keeping it that long or longer. By then Nehalem should be bargain basement prices.

You presented information in an obviously slanted and misinformed way. I try to let these things slide, but I couldn't.

August 21, 2008 8:30:02 PM

azkyte said:
Thanks for the replys so far they have been very helpful. I appreicate all the unbiased information as well.

I notice no-one is factoring in the SB750 to the equation, am I over-hyping it?

Also I noitced the AMD solution saves me an pretty big amount of cash upfront and in the longer run when next-gen gpus come out ill just crossfire my HD 4850 and save around $100 bucks again.
(using 8800gt SLI vs HD 4870 as reference).

But still are these reason good enough justifying the dismissal of a q6600? Or am I just hyped up by the rest of the Tom's Hardware Forum's q6600 rocks all attitude?

Thanks in advance
It really depends on how much money you have to spend. Only you can decide if you can/want to afford it. The AMD will do you, but as said don't expect the upgrade down the road or you may be running a shiny new chip with a seriously outdated mobo, and that's no fun. Also, there are never any guarantees about future compatibility. You may decide that the CPU can do the job longer and the mobo won't be usable when you want to upgrade, either due to the socket, VGA interface or some feature you really want. The Q6600 does rock and is easily OCed with a good HS and a P35 or newer mobo. If you don't want to OC then it's more of a toss up.
August 21, 2008 8:32:21 PM

azkyte said:
Thanks for the replys so far they have been very helpful. I appreicate all the unbiased information as well.

I notice no-one is factoring in the SB750 to the equation, am I over-hyping it?

Also I noitced the AMD solution saves me an pretty big amount of cash upfront and in the longer run when next-gen gpus come out ill just crossfire my HD 4850 and save around $100 bucks again.
(using 8800gt SLI vs HD 4870 as reference).

But still are these reason good enough justifying the dismissal of a q6600? Or am I just hyped up by the rest of the Tom's Hardware Forum's q6600 rocks all attitude?

Thanks in advance


Both are good solutions. Rest assured. However, if you happened to read my discussion regarding overclocking, I would recommend that you buy something based on stock performance (since you intend to not upgrade the whole rig, except for the video-card, in the next years). Q6600 pwns big time in the Photoshop benchmarks I have seen - and it's a wonderful CPU, even at stock -, however, now I would go for the AMD platform. 790GX with SB750 makes a very nice system (and I doubt a motherboard maker, say one like ASUS, would not provide the upgrade path. Damn, my $69 AM2 Foxconn mobo can run 95W Phenoms *officially*). If you happen to feel like needing more power in graphics then you can go HybridCrossfire with a cheap card or just put a 4850 in there later. Personally, I would get a Phenom 9750 (actually, I would get a Deneb, but I know you can't wait) with a 790GX based mobo or a Q6600 with a P45 based mobo. Since AMD's 690v already does quite a good job with Aero and my Warcraft III, I supposed I would be astonished with the 790GX. While I agree that a solution like the 4850 is awesome, I also think this chipset can take care of what *I* need right now. Take a good look at the benchmarks and see if it suits you! : )

Check the prices too. Both are *awesome* rigs. You know what my opinion is.
a c 108 à CPUs
August 21, 2008 8:45:05 PM

azkyte said:
Thanks for the replys so far they have been very helpful. I appreicate all the unbiased information as well.

I notice no-one is factoring in the SB750 to the equation, am I over-hyping it?

Also I noitced the AMD solution saves me an pretty big amount of cash upfront and in the longer run when next-gen gpus come out ill just crossfire my HD 4850 and save around $100 bucks again.
(using 8800gt SLI vs HD 4870 as reference).

But still are these reason good enough justifying the dismissal of a q6600? Or am I just hyped up by the rest of the Tom's Hardware Forum's q6600 rocks all attitude?

Thanks in advance


I wasn't minimizing the 790gx and sb750 - especially since Gary at AT got the Phenom 9850 to 3GHz on stock volts (with the L3/IMC @ 2600MHz IIRC).

Since he used the Foxconn 790gx maybe the extra $30 instead of the Biostar mobo would be a good investment. The Foxconn mobo does have mosfet cooling (but only takes up to 8Gb of RAM as compared to 16Gb for the Biostar - not a big deal really)

If you decide on Intel I'd take the e8xxx over the q6600 (unless you are certain your modelling and design software can run 4 parallel threads across those four cores). More RAM and fast disk I/O are more important in multitasking and PS than extra cores.

Better hurry and make your decision - I see this thread soon degrading :lol: 
August 21, 2008 8:53:05 PM

:lol:  @ all fanboys stay away. Yup.. that always werks.
August 21, 2008 8:54:07 PM

Zorg said:
Yeah I did, it's nice of you to add that you were referring to all CPUs, not that it matters all that much. What you may not understand is that the Q6600 @ 3G is a mild OC not some balls to the wall OC. If you were advising against 3.6G or even 3.4G, long term i.e., more than 2 years. I wouldn't disagree, but I will about a 3G.


Dude, I agree that's usually kinda easy - perhaps "easy" is even and understatement - but there's absolutely no guarantee that he will make it. Should he buy something thinking of the performance he *can* have or the one he will *certainly* have? Well, it's up to him. I agree with you regarding the mild OC, but I don't think it would suit him that well.

Quote:
Again you don't take the extent of the OC into consideration. An OC isn't on or off, there is a sliding scale and that scale is different for different processors. A mild OC on the Core2 CPUs was a medium, heavy, or unattainable OC on past CPUs, and some newer ones, depending on which one your talking about.


Many people have Q6600s at 3.0, E8400s at 3.6 and Q9450s at 3.2 with totally stable operation. However, I'm sure you'll find people who can't take a E8400 past 3.2 - even good overclockers with good parts. Just take a look at the forums. Many problems have a solution and can be related to a simple BIOS setting, but many also have not and can't. Not only he will need a good CPU, but a good mobo, good memory modules and so on. Of course he can also face problems running at stock, but that's much more likely if overclocking. When at least 80% of the people you know say they are overclocking well it's hard not to give it a try, but what if he's one of the 20% that get a chip that will become unstable soon?

Quote:
Hell, 2 years is a short period of time he could easily get away with 3.4G and it would last a lot longer than that, assuming that he was able to keep Vcore and temps at a reasonable level.


Many people post things like "24/7 stable overclock for 3 months, guys" and then "Suddenly, my PC wouldn't post anymore, people. :C". Again: it's up to him to decide if it's worth the risk.

Quote:
Ok, your starting to ramble on a little here. I can easily find you articles by the same sites you mentioned, and others, that will tout the "free" OC to 3G. Would you like links?


Thanks, however, I have read many articles as the one you stated - and I generally agree with you and with them. But I also have read some that say that even if you don't touch the voltages you cannot be sure of stable operation or about the time the chip will last. Want the link? ; D

Quote:
You so funny. That is exactly what I'm trying to explain to you. You don't need to be an OCer to get the "free" 3G OC on the Q6600. It's so easy even a caveman can do it.


Exactly. You don't. Perhaps that's the deal: anybody think they will get top - or even mild - overclocks with relative ease, since 80% of current CPUs (read mostly Intel's) do overclock quite well. By this I'm not saying I believe the OP doesn't know how to OC, but this "anybody can overclock with full stability" is just as big a pile of BS as "anybody who overclocks will get theirs chips burned".

Quote:
By the way, I have my Q6600 @ 3.2G/1600 1:1 800 with all voltages on auto except RAM @ 2.2V. My Prime95 small FFT temps are 56,56,54,54 with an ambient of ~72F. CPU-Z load Vcore is 1.264V and VID is 1.3V, which is not one of the lower ones. I have screen shots if you need them.

It is 24/7 stable and I have no concerns that it will last at least 5 years. If it's not taxed by anything I want to do, then I plan on keeping it that long or longer. By then Nehalem should be bargain basement prices.

You presented information in an obviously slanted and misinformed way. I try to let these things slide, but I couldn't.


Nice to see your experience with your rig. : D Well, to debate is the point of this forum, huh? ; D It has been a nice discussion so far (although I don't agree with the -1 on my first post), however, if I'm buying something that I'll need for the next 2 years, I would put stability above all (especially since in many scenarios most gains through overclocking are barely worth the effort and the time).
August 21, 2008 9:13:58 PM

I don't want to rehash the whole thing. The OC is "almost" and I say almost idiot proof. You do need to watch temps, but you have to do that anyway, especially with that joke of a stock 775 push pin cooler.

I don't care for the thumbs down myself. I would rather people explain their position. I gave you a thumbs up to zero you out. No guarantee it will stay that way.
August 23, 2008 4:16:48 AM

I do think overclocking should be taken into consideration if the OP is willing to O/C. Of course, there are no guarantees that a Q6600 will hit 3GHz stable, but the odds are heavily stacked in your favour. I've yet to see a Q6600 that doesn't hit 3GHz stable, of course that doesn't mean one doesn't exist, but it'll be exceedingly rare I'd imagine.
August 23, 2008 4:58:26 AM

well taking into account the price of a q6600 and a p43 and the time constraints, i dont think I can wait for it....
August 23, 2008 5:14:25 AM

azkyte said:
well taking into account the price of a q6600 and a p43 and the time constraints, i dont think I can wait for it....


What do you mean by time constraints? Newegg has a fair few P43 mobos in stock, though I do understand you are on a budget and want to reduce costs. TBH if its gaming performance you're after, get a dual core, not a quad core. An E7200 for ~$120 will perform better than the Q6600 in most games. By the time more games start utilising quads, drop in a (by then) cheap Q9650 and you're good to go. I understand you won't be able to upgrade to Nehalem on an LGA775 mobo, but you're not really any better off (from a performance viewpoint) with an AM2+ rig upgrading to Deneb since its slower than Yorkfield anyway.
a b à CPUs
August 23, 2008 6:56:34 AM

BaronMatrix said:
The MD solution is the most future proof in terms of new archs working in it. Unless AMD releases a new chipset, all that will be needed is a BIOS flash for existing boards to use Deneb. Of course, could always go to Penryn if it's still around.

It's really a toss up. I can't say which you shoul dget, but i can say either one will be fine for 2 years. If you can save a few bucks one way or the other that may be the deciding factor. It looks like the AMD is a little cheaper and just as powerful for the most part.



Where are you getting your info? Neverland? Show me anything other than AMDZone that says a 9600 is anywhere close to a q6600. How many AM2 boards had a compatible BIOS for AM2+ conversion. ABSOLUTE B.S.!!!!
August 23, 2008 7:29:44 AM

BadTrip said:
Where are you getting your info? Neverland? Show me anything other than AMDZone that says a 9600 is anywhere close to a q6600. How many AM2 boards had a compatible BIOS for AM2+ conversion. ABSOLUTE B.S.!!!!


To be fair to Baron a Phenom 9600 is not massively slower than a Q6600, around 13.5% on average according to THG's review: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-9600-bla... and it is a fair bit cheaper too.

Though 'just as powerful for the most part' would be pushing it since its slower in 18 out of 20 benchmarks, but we can excuse that since Baron tends to have a slight bias towards AMD. ;) 
'
a b à CPUs
August 23, 2008 9:28:07 AM

Iv'e got a Q6600 on a P35 and I am pretty happy ... no SLI but a decent single card like a 9600GT or better suits me fine.

Given how bad AMD stuffed up the AM2 compatability with Phenom I do think Deneb will fit in nicely if you have a new AM2+ Mobo ... problem is what cpu do you put in while waiting for it? Seems like a bit of a waste unless you wait till it arrives before buying.

Nehalem isn't here yet either.

While the Q6600 is a sweet deal at present the newer 45nm quads are slowly dropping in price ... like the 9450 etc ... so check the prices there. A little bit more performace I guess ... stock that is.

A good start is a decent PSU and case ... then a decent graphics card ... you could look at buying a 4850 or 4870 there ... the 260 NV card is also dropping a bit in price ... wouldn't buy it at the curret price here tho.

My recommendation is just to get a Q6600 and a decent grahics card now ...

It will still be running sweet in 18 months or more.

You could otherwise wait forever.

I waited while sitting on an AMD 939 box ... and got orphaned.

Get something you are happy with now.

Good luck.

:) 
a b à CPUs
August 23, 2008 2:05:06 PM

AMD motherboards are generally better than Intels...

Intels CPUs are generally better than AMD CPUs...

Deneb is supposed to slightly beat Yorkfield...

If you are going SLi or Crossfire, go AMD

If you are going for higher performance for now, go Intel...

In 3-4 years you might get a new computer... upgradeability is about the same...

AMD should be cheaper... pair the AM2+ with a Athlon X2, then upgrade to Deneb... should be cheaper in the long term...

Intel would be more expensive but faster... a Q6600 or E8400 would blow the AMD outta the water...

Anyways you shouldn't be embarraed about your rig, my last one was:

Athlon XP

VIA Unichrome

768MB DDR-400

80GB + 320GB HD

300W PSU

Windows XP

That was my gaming rig ;) 
a b à CPUs
August 23, 2008 2:26:07 PM

epsilon84 said:
To be fair to Baron a Phenom 9600 is not massively slower than a Q6600, around 13.5% on average according to THG's review: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-9600-bla... and it is a fair bit cheaper too.

Though 'just as powerful for the most part' would be pushing it since its slower in 18 out of 20 benchmarks, but we can excuse that since Baron tends to have a slight bias towards AMD. ;) 
'


I agree with you about the processor. I am just sick and tired of Baron BS. I was a member when he first showed up, and all he has done is spout CRAP, which I believe is a violation of the T.O.S. to knowingly spread false information. Either he is a liar or an Idiot. I tend to believe the latter.
a b à CPUs
August 23, 2008 2:30:46 PM

He's alright... sure he's abit biased but he's alright...
a c 99 à CPUs
August 23, 2008 3:01:20 PM

Either a Q6600 or a Phenom X4 9850 setup would work well. The Q6600 runs a little cooler but the performance is about the same. You do real work on your machine, so leave the CPU at stock. Overclocking is like running alpha and beta software- something you only do on a non-mission-critical machine as it often takes a lot of screwing around and can lead to instability. If I were going for a Q6600 setup, I'd get a Q6600, a P43 board, two 2 GB sticks of DDR2-800, your choice of 64-bit OS, and that Radeon 4850, since you're going to be playing some games as well. If I wanted to do a Phenom setup, I'd get the Phenom X4 9850, a 780G board, two 2 GB sticks of DDR2-1066, your choice of 64-bit OS, and that Radeon 4850. Both setups ought to be very close in price and performance for a standard desktop setup.

I would probably base my choice on which one you can put together for the least money to allow for a bigger monitor. If you're doing 3D design and circuit analysis, you want at least a 20" monitor at 1680x1050 or 1600x1200, if not a 24" 1920x1200 monitor or a pair of monitors. When you are doing real work on a computer, more screen real estate is a godsend. I'd also not worry so much about upgrade pathways as those are usually very poor. Get what you need today and you'll be much happier.
August 23, 2008 3:05:14 PM

Reynod,

Truth, from what I consider somewhat of an AMD fanboi, honest advice. Tell me your are at 3G, at least.



amdfangirl,

Are you stalking Reynod? :lol: 




August 23, 2008 3:23:11 PM

MU_Engineer said:
You do real work on your machine, so leave the CPU at stock. Overclocking is like running alpha and beta software
I have to disagree, if you have a company with 50+ machines I can see your point, otherwise no.
3G isn't even a true OC, it's a fake OC. :lol: 
RAID0 is another story, bad idea for mission critical work.
August 23, 2008 3:51:04 PM

I'm OC my Q6600 to 3.2ghz atm. So is that... ahh.. semi fake OC? :cry: 

Edit:

I should say.. RE-OC my Q6600. I'm on a different MB.
August 23, 2008 3:58:49 PM

Yup, If you want to be a man you have to go 3.6G on air. :lol: 
August 23, 2008 4:07:54 PM

But But but... 3.2ghz is magical.

I have it set 8x400=3.2ghz. So when it rests on the x6, it's 6x400=2.4ghz, it's stock speed. :D 

And.. and... my FSB rating is 1600.

At 3.6ghz.. I just don't wanna sweat or die of dehydration. :sweat: 
a b à CPUs
August 24, 2008 8:34:06 AM

Zorg said:

amdfangirl,

Are you stalking Reynod? :lol: 


:lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

At least not in the Linux section =P
a b à CPUs
August 24, 2008 1:49:18 PM

Zorg ... I am just fine at 9 X 333 ... runs fine and is cool.

AFG is a fellow Aussie ... stalker is unkind.

I retired my chiller ... and three water rigs ... after drowning a nice video card ... keep your 3.6 on air ... too nasty for me.

Grimmy I might try the 8 X 400 ... is the memory bandwidth much advantage?

My ram just started shaking in its boots ... its vanilla 800 stuff.

And to the OP ... did you get any good advice from us fanbois??

heh heh.
August 24, 2008 2:06:26 PM

I'm testing for stability atm. I remember reading an article showing the difference on dual and single. Didn't really show any advantage.

But I thought what the hell. Its DDR2 800, so why not run it at its advertise speed in dual channel, rather then under it. :lol: 
August 24, 2008 2:08:50 PM

3G is fine, the difference between 3G and 3.2G isn't that noticeable.

I was joking about the stalking, notice the :lol: .

3.6G on air was also a joke, not that It can't be done it's just way to hot.
!