Which CPU for gaming? Building new system

[g335]

Hello

I am building a gaming system. Which Intel processors are good for gaming and not too expensive? Do I need a quad core?

I will be playing games such as Starcaft, Diablo 2, WOW, Lord of the Rings online, Warhammer online, Starcaft 2 and Diablo 3 when they come out. And maybe Far Cry, COD 4, etc.

I was looking at the q6600. Is this a good processor?

Help

 

[trinix]

There are a lot of good processors, but it depends on if you are willing to overclock or not. AMD processors are cheaper, but at the same time produce less. The intel are stronger and have more room for easy overclocking.

Good processors atm from Intel are the 7200 for great overclocking at a cheap price. The 5200 is the cheap one on the list, but you will lack the cache in some games and the 8400/8500/8600 for good overclockers and good value, 6 MB cache helps these out a lot.

Just look at your budget and choose one of those.

 

[IH8U]

Yes the Q6600 is a good proc, I'm personally waiting on the Phenom II in January (looks to be the 8th). These will drop into any AM2+ motherboard. However most of the games you listed are MMO's, for those a simple dual core would not only be cheaper, but more effective. (no MMO's that I know of are scaled for more than 2 cores, if that).

 

[mi1ez]

The Q6600 is a good processor for the price. If you're gaming a higher clocked dual might also be worth considering unless you're planning on OCing the quad to similar speeds.

 

[zenmaster]

Yes the Q6600 is a good proc, I'm personally waiting on the Phenom II in January (looks to be the 8th). These will drop into any AM2+ motherboard. However most of the games you listed are MMO's, for those a simple dual core would not only be cheaper, but more effective. (no MMO's that I know of are scaled for more than 2 cores, if that).

Yes, it will drop in any.
But only work on some ............
BIOS support will be required........

Same held true for Phenom and AM2.
Same held true for New Intel Chips vs older 775 boards.

 

[dechy]

Yes the Q6600 is a good proc, I'm personally waiting on the Phenom II in January (looks to be the 8th). These will drop into any AM2+ motherboard. However most of the games you listed are MMO's, for those a simple dual core would not only be cheaper, but more effective. (no MMO's that I know of are scaled for more than 2 cores, if that).

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:RKMxxZWCGZIJ:www.hardwaregeeks.com/board/showthread.php%3Ft%3D32483+warhammer+online+multithreaded&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=ca

A coupld of MMOs in there. I think AoC is as well, as me and my brother have G15s with the performance monitor, and when we used to play AoC (the game had SO MUCH POTENTIAL, talk about driving a game to the ground...) my e8400 clearly showed both cores hitting pretty damn high on the monitor (around 85%) and his q9450 hitting all 4 cores around 60% at all times (he was playing 1 rez step up from me)

Also, unless Blizzard are complete retards (and they are anything but) SC2 & D3 should be optimized for multithreading more than just 2 threads (or worst, a single thread).

I got my e8400 7 months ago, but if I had to buy this late in the "game", I hit quads up for sure. Either get a Q6600 with a top of the line HSF & bump that puppy higher than a stock e8400 or outright buy a fast quad (but end up paying significantly more)

 

[trinix]

Blizzard wouldn't need to optimize his code for multitreaded. It runs on any computer that can run windows. On any dual core it runs with no problem at all.

It's one of the big marketing tricks they used. It was to conquer the Asian market. They succeeded and run 11mil subs. Other games like AoC and the dreaded vanguard (no even a 24 core with a gazillion gigs of ram will not run this baby very good, but it's still a great game) have chosen for lifelike graphics rather than cartoonish looks and it requires higher settings. I don't know about AoC, but vanguard doesn't use more than 2 cores.

a Q6600 is always a good buy, forgot to name it in my previous post, but it depends if you are going to need it. Normal users will have to wait a very long time to use it effectively for normal office and surfing tasks and games are still undecided. They are starting to want quads, but still a lot run max on duals. If they change it soon, a quad will be the desired gaming cpu or your game plays a lot better with 4 cores, but until that time, a dual core is still better bang for your bucks.

 

[huron]

I agree - the Q6600 is a nice chip.

For gaming, dual core processors are utilized greater at the moment. If it were me, and gaming was my main goal, I would check out the E7200 or the E8400/E8500.

 

[jerreece]

I run a Q6600 myself, Overclocked to 3.2Ghz. Runs everything very well. It's nice having four cores for multitasking. I typically run my games with other crap in the background (Antivirus, Firefox sometimes, Fraps, etc).

"Right now" an E8400 is probably the overall champion from what I've seen. Tomorrow though, as games are better coded for multithreaded, quad cores may find a bit of an advantage.

Unless you're maxing out all your gear (i.e. fastest video card available, etc) I don't think you can go wrong with a Q6600 right now. A highly clocked dual-core may have an advantage right now over quads if you're throwing in a GTX 280 or running SLI on high end cards like that.

But, with the right motherboard, the Q6600 is pretty easy to overclock (Intel based boards are best, though you can't SLI on those).

 

[sailer]

If I was to build a computer, I would build it with a quad. No doubt about it, dual core processors are good, but the world is turning to quad core. At some point, all new games will be optimized for quads, as well as business software. Duals will hold out for MMOs for a long time, but that will eventually change as well. I don't think it really makes all that much difference if you get an Intel or an AMD quad. AMD probably has the advantage in price, while Intel has the advantage in higher clocks, but really, with few exceptions, any chip doing 2.6ghz or better will handle any game out there. Most game performance comes from the video card, not the CPU. By the way, I own computers and have one with a 9950 BE and one with a QX9650, so I speak from experience here.

Yes, the Q6600 is a good processor, but better is one of the Yorkies. An AMD 9950 BE, paired with a good motherboard running a SB750 southbridge is also good and will probably upgrade to Phenom II. A lot if it depends on your budget, as well as your expectations. One other factor, the newer the hardware that you buy, the longer it should last before becoming obsolete.

 

[rodney_ws]

It's amazing how much life the Q6600 has in it? If AMD ever does go belly up, I'm blaming the Q6600 for doing it... that's one hell of a CPU Intel cranked out at one hell of a price point.

 

[mtyermom]

I <3 my q6600 G0

 

[enigma067]

There are a lot of good processors, but it depends on if you are willing to overclock or not. AMD processors are cheaper, but at the same time produce less. The intel are stronger and have more room for easy overclocking.

Good processors atm from Intel are the 7200 for great overclocking at a cheap price. The 5200 is the cheap one on the list, but you will lack the cache in some games and the 8400/8500/8600 for good overclockers and good value, 6 MB cache helps these out a lot.

Just look at your budget and choose one of those.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivx0XYMCZJw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq_XG411Lik

Yeah , AMD chips produce less alright.

http://img.tomshardware.com/forum/uk/icones/smilies/lol.gif

 

[enigma067]

It's amazing how much life the Q6600 has in it? If AMD ever does go belly up, I'm blaming the Q6600 for doing it... that's one hell of a CPU Intel cranked out at one hell of a price point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivx0XYMCZJw

Yeah, Intel's little glue job runs like a raped ape, doesn't it?

 

[mtyermom]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivx0XYMCZJw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq_XG411Lik

Yeah , AMD chips produce less alright.

http://img.tomshardware.com/forum/uk/icones/smilies/lol.gif

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivx0XYMCZJw

Yeah, Intel's little glue job runs like a raped ape, doesn't it?

LOL @ glue job

...

Thunderman?


EDIT: btw, those videos prove nothing more than your fanboy status

 

[emp]

I'd hold any purchases until Deneb is released in a month. If what we've been hearing lately is true, it's going to be quite the little monster.

 

[g335]

Thank you for your inputs. I am not sure if I will do any over clocking but I want to make sure that I have a good processor.

One of decisions is to go with Intel or AMD.

So the vote is q6600?

 

[Malovane]

Well, for comparison sake, the AMD 9850 BE is the rough equivalent of the Q6600 in stock performance, while the 9950 slightly edges out the Q6600. The AMD chips will suck down a bit more power and not overclock as high as the Q6600, though the difference in overclocking is not as much with AMD's new 750 southbridge chipset. I run my 9850 BE at 3.4 Ghz and it runs everything just fine. Many people run a Q6600 at 3.2 Ghz, and enthusiasts with good cooling push 3.6 Ghz frequently. Because the Q6600 has a lower clock speed than the 9850 at stock (better clock per clock performance), the Q6600 is therefore the better enthusiast chip.

However, a 790GX board is inexpensive, and offers good overclocking abilities. It also offers compatibility with upcoming Phenom II AM2+ processors, which may very well be the equivalent of higher end C2Q's for a fraction of the price. A C2Q board may have limited life expectancy now that i7 and its new socket have arrived. Both platforms will be phased out in a year and a half, with the AM3 socket coming up for AMD and the i7 platform taking off already for Intel. Of the two current platforms, AM2+ probably has tad more life in it due to the advent of Phenom II.

Keep in mind in that you don't really need super quality ram for an AMD system (just throw in some DDR2-800), and that games are more GPU limited these days than anything else. Factor in everything, and AMD has an inexpensive system that will in most accounts perform just as well as Intel's more expensive solutions in gaming.

Just clock whatever quad you get past 3 Ghz, get a decent GPU (at minimum an ATI Radeon 4850 or Nvidia 9800 GTX+) and you should be fine for a while.