Q6600 Vs. Q8200

[yonyz]

Hi,

There's almost no price difference between the Intel Q6600 and Intel Q8200 processors.
Assuming that I won't do any OC to the CPU, which one I should get?

It would-be put with 800mhz or 1066mhz RAM (most likely 800mhz).

Thanks in advance.

 

[festerovic]

Always get the newer smaller die chips when specs between them are so close.

q6600 = more cache, but older tech. Also slower FSB
q8200 = less cache, but potential for better OC and has newer tech. Faster FSB.

You would never see the difference between the two unless you OC.

 

[mdma35]

you will benefit more from Q8200 is 45 nm and Q6600 is 65nm wich means more or less same perfomance but less power consumption and less heat production and if you gona OC in the future who knows better buy something that has more potential for the future between this 2

 

[JDocs]

@festerovic. The Q6600 has a much better potential for overclocking due to its higher multiplier and lower FSB. When overclocking the multiplier can not be raised above the default (x9 for the Q6600 and x7 for the Q8200) unless its an ultra expensive extreme edition. Therefore most of the time overclocking is down by raising the FSB.

Additionally the lower FSB is countered by the higher cache. However the Q8200 is still (at the core of the chip) faster mhz for mhz.

 

[festerovic]

Jdocs, I mostly agree considering raw CPU power on q6600 would be better after OC. But I'd also counter with the idea that you may get more overall system speed with the FSB being much higher after OC on the q8200 than the q6600.

 

[cadder]

Why no OC?

There is likely only a small percentage difference in the 2 processors at stock speeds, but I see lots of people here that get their Q6600 to speeds 33% higher than stock.

Seems that it would be better to get whichever processor is cheaper or more available and add a mild OC.

 

[captjackdaniels80]

I'm torn between these 2 processors right now as well. I'm not building a computer myself, just buying one from the store. (i know, i know....)

the concern for me is, I like the notion of OCing the q6600, but it just seems really risky with stock parts, from what I've read. I don't have a lot of time of invest in modding my hardware this time of year (school is pretty heavy with midterms and papers what whatnot), but I would like to get the most out of whatever computer I buy.

that said, everyone here is (obviously) far more knowledgeable about this than me, so I'll follow up with this question:

Can a q6600 be safely OCed in a retail computer without spending much time/money on getting aftermarket parts? The computer i'm looking at is an HP Pavilion.

I've read the beginners guide to overclocking, and it actually seems like an intimidating amount of work...again, bearing in mind that I don't have a lot of time these days.

I wouldn't plan on doing a very agressive OC. Probably just take it up to 3.1ghz or so, since i've read on various threads on this site that that is reletively little for this processor.

would i be better just getting the q8200 and leave OCing to some time later in life when i have more time?

thanks for any replies!

 

[seager]

What is the point in overclocking your computer when your buying one that will most likely be bottle necked by your motherboard? HP isnt going to give you a motherboard that has the same FSB as your CPU most likely... hence the reason they never give u any specs about the motherboard.

but you could buy a non stock fan for like 30 bucks and throw it on your q6600 if u plan to OC anyhow.

 

[captjackdaniels80]

Thats a valid point; one of which hadn't occured to me. I didn't realize they would use a motherboard that would completely defeat the point of having a good processor. This is tricky business...I'd be lying if i said i knew how to just "throw on a fan", although I'm sure its probably not that hard. (and theres probably guides on this website that could help a lot, too.) As you say, there's not much point to that if the motherboard cant handle it. I'm going to browse around a bt and see if i can find some specs on the motherboard, and i'll update when I do.

I consider myself usually fairly tech savvy, but this is unexplored land for me. thanks for the quick reply!

 

[captjackdaniels80]

as promised, i looked a bit further in to the motherboard and learned that it is an Asus IPIBL-LB, which im sure will mean more to you than me. Theres a ton of info on it here:

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c01324212&lc=en&dlc=sv&cc=se&product=3805277&lang=sv

good? bad?

 

[loneninja]

Dell, HP, and other OEM computer manufacturers usually don't have any overclocking options in their BIOS. If you buy HP I can almost 100% assure you that you won't be overclocking it.

 

[captjackdaniels80]

Darn...oh well. its probably for the best that i hold off on that for now anyway, until a time when i have more time/money.

I think I'll go with the q8200 over the q6600 then, because it seems to be a lot more available these days in OEM computers that i am looking at.

I spend most of my time doing school work...typically writing grant proposals and whatnot, so my work isn't perticularly demanding, itself. As a hobby, however, I do a lot of audio recording, usually using a program called Cubase SX3, and video editing just using Adobe Premiere CS3. Can I safely assume that the Q8200 with a Nvidia 9500GT will suffice?

I'm coming from using a Turion ML-40 in my laptop with 2 gigs of ram and integrated graphics. I doubt anyone will be surprised to learn that it has a tendency to overheat and shut off.

Thanks again for the feedback; I've learned a lot in the last 2 days reading these forums.