Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Intel Core2 Quad: Q6600 vs Q8200 - Which is better?

Last response: in CPUs
Share

Which is better, the Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 or Q8200?

Total: 96 votes (50 blank votes)

  • Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 is better
  • 34 %
  • Intel Core2 Quad Q8200 is better
  • 23 %
  • Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 is better, when OC
  • 21 %
  • Intel Core2 Quad Q8200 is better, when OC
  • 23 %
March 14, 2009 11:53:49 PM

Hello

I am trying to figure out which I should get, the Q6600 or the Q8200?

The Q6600 is over a year older than the Q8200, but from most of the specs, it seems that the Q6600 is better.

There is a $20 difference in price.

I will be using the CPU for virtualisation and other Server tasks.

Please tell me which CPU is best.

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 12:11:29 AM

Well, the Q8200 will use less power and operates on a higher FSB at stock speeds.

Q6600: 266mhz x 9 = 2.4Ghz
Q8200: 333mhz x 7 = 2.33Ghz

If you are not planning to overclock, I would think that the Q6600 is the better choice. You probably can't beat it for performance without going to a Q9400:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Or of course an AMD Phenom II:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Hmm it's dropped to 200 bucks... that makes it a very good buy if you have the board to run it.
March 15, 2009 12:25:54 AM

Thanks
Related resources
March 15, 2009 12:33:46 AM

The Phenom IIs are sick, you should check them out.
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 12:54:59 AM

I got the Q9400, partly because it was on sale at microcenter and because it seemed to have the lowest multiplier for a good overclock. The Q6600 is probably easiest to get a speed increase with. Because of the lower multiplier, a Q9400 and especially a Q8200 will take more work. It will require much better memory and a board that will allow a high FSB.
March 15, 2009 2:13:50 AM

So confirming, you would like me to get the Q6600?
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 2:16:30 AM

I would say the 8200 is the way to go actually. It's cheaper, and overclocks just fine. It also uses less power and produces less heat.
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 8:27:55 AM

But if you aren't overclocking, the 6600 benchmarks faster.
March 15, 2009 8:59:38 AM

Would I need a special heatsink and power supply in order to have a successful safe OverClock?
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 9:02:19 AM

Proximon said:
But if you aren't overclocking, the 6600 benchmarks faster.


Not by enough to matter.

Its clock speed is nearly the same, and it is slightly faster per clock due to the 45nm process.
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 9:09:13 AM

You can overclock a little bit if your case is adequately ventilated and you use the stock cooler as long as your board allows it. Beyond that, you'll want a well cooled case and a decent cooler.
March 15, 2009 9:39:51 AM

cjl said:
Not by enough to matter.

Its clock speed is nearly the same, and it is slightly faster per clock due to the 45nm process.


What about the L2 cache?
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 10:38:02 AM

Not hugely significant. It does make a bit of a difference, but not a lot for most apps.
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2009 11:43:11 AM

The 8200 actually runs slower (2.33GHz). It just isn't enough of a speed difference to matter.
March 15, 2009 12:35:34 PM

Hello

Thanks for all the replies. Since the answer to my question is still disputed, I have decided to add a poll (see 1st post).

Please participate in the poll, I think I included all options needed to make an educated poll on the aforementioned CPUs.

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy

PS: cjl, I need the GHz, for Virtualisation. Also, I read in the specs that the Q6600 supports Intel Virtualisation, whilst the Q8200 doesn't. Does this make much of a difference, or is it just a marketting ploy?
March 15, 2009 1:37:54 PM

I think the Q6600, mainly since it has the extra cache. Although the difference between a CPU with 8megs and one with 4megs is much less than if you compared a CPU with 512K with one with 256K. Basically only having 4megs isn't really going to bottleneck anything, but you can never have too much of the stuff.
March 15, 2009 2:00:49 PM

Panarchy said:
I read in the specs that the Q6600 supports Intel Virtualisation, whilst the Q8200 doesn't. Does this make much of a difference, or is it just a marketting ploy?


Anymore, VM software is optimized for VT (and AMD-V). I would definately get a CPU that supports it in your case. Unless you're running old VM software with no plans of upgrading it.
March 15, 2009 10:25:15 PM

Quote:
If your paying $200 for a 2.4ghz processor, why dont you just go with the Phenom 2 940 at 3ghz and overclock it. You can get a P2 940, 4gb of ram and a 790GX mobo with newegg combos for the same price as the i7 920 processor alone (about $290). Which is less than your going to pay for a Q6600/8200, mobo, and 4gb of ram. Besides, a s775 system is non-upgradeable because Intel is not going to make any more s775 quads.

Your saying you need the ghz, then go with something faster and more modern and more upgradeable for less money. Make sense?

Hello

Thanks for your reply.

Been reading the review: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/phenom-ii-940,2114-...

It has 6MB L3 cache...

What does this signify?;



Anyways, I'm happy with the guide, since it compares to the exact model (Q6600).

Performance Analysis;
Quote:
The Core 2 Quad Q6600 is about 9% slower on average


The price analysis is different for me since I'm not in America, here is what I have worked out;

Intel;


AMD;


I'd like to get the price a lot cheaper... so if there are any ideas, I'd really appreciate them.

Also, I'd like to continue the discussion on whether Q6600 is better then the Q8200 (Q8200 is $20 cheaper), and the discussion on Phenom II vs Intel Core2 Quad.

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy

PS: The main price difference is due to the GFX Card
March 15, 2009 10:36:29 PM

Phenom II X3 720 - $150
Asus M4A78T-E - $140
G.Skill DDR3-1600 6GB (3x2gb) - $100

Your three main components are about 400 bucks.

For your Q6600 setup, you're at 300 for the processor alone, plus DDR2.
Your call.
March 15, 2009 10:41:47 PM

Also, if you wanna go the AM2+ Phenom II X4 940 BE, it's about the same price.

CPU - $200
Mobo - $130
RAM - Two 2x2gb sets, 50 bucks each = $100

a c 265 à CPUs
a b å Intel
March 15, 2009 10:59:39 PM

Panarchy said:
Hello

Thanks for all the replies. Since the answer to my question is still disputed, I have decided to add a poll (see 1st post).

Please participate in the poll, I think I included all options needed to make an educated poll on the aforementioned CPUs.

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy

PS: cjl, I need the GHz, for Virtualisation. Also, I read in the specs that the Q6600 supports Intel Virtualisation, whilst the Q8200 doesn't. Does this make much of a difference, or is it just a marketting ploy?


You need the GHZ, but do you need the quad? A faster clocked E8400 might serve you better.
a b à CPUs
March 16, 2009 2:38:56 AM

I was able to do some reading last night and I guess cjl is correct.

Q8200 does make more sense over all. I was under the impression that the higher multiplier of the Q6600 would outweigh the benefits of the Q8200, and it is indeed a factor in overclocking, but the newer production process and lower voltages should make for a better CPU overall.

If you were using an OLDER motherboard, the Q6600 might be a better choice. Why? Because the FSB might not go too high, and so you would not get as much out of an overclock with a Q8200. A modern P45 board can hit a 500+ FSB. I know mine will, on air.

Agree on the case/PSU. You should look for an Antec case that has a 380W PSU included. This will be an EA380, a good stable unit.
a b à CPUs
March 16, 2009 10:52:49 AM

Actually, for virtualization, I'll have to retract my earlier statement. The 6600 supports special virtualization features that make it faster than the 8200 for that specific application. Therefore, specifically for virtualization, go for the 6600 over the 8200. If it is available, the Q9400 would also be a good choice.
March 16, 2009 4:44:15 PM

The phenom II 920 / 940 are faster than the q6600 on stock speed.
March 16, 2009 10:24:22 PM

Hello Everyone

I'd just like to thank you for your replies.

TheThirdLevel & Shadow703793, the prices you are mentioned are unavailable to me, since I'm not in America or Canada.

I will be using the CPU for Virtualisation.

I will need 8GB of RAM.

I (probably) will be OC.

I will be using the stock heatsink, and case fans.

Please recommend which CPU is best for the above setup.

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy
a b à CPUs
March 17, 2009 12:42:44 AM

^In either case if OCing you should probably get an after market HSF like a S1283, TRUE 120,etc.
March 19, 2009 5:09:47 AM

VOTES;

13/9 in favour of Q6600.

Please tell more people to participate in the poll.

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy
March 21, 2009 12:41:33 AM

Please send more people to this topic!

Current results;

7
6
7
6

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy
March 21, 2009 1:14:34 AM

Q6600 FTW!!!!!!!!!!!
March 22, 2009 4:20:09 AM

^Thanks! I won't be purchasing this Server for a while yet, first I need to work out the specs, and earn the money!

Poll;
8
6
7
6

Please continue to recommend people to this topic!

Thanks in advance,

Panarchy
a b à CPUs
March 23, 2009 9:36:26 AM

I reckon the Q8200 is better in power consumption and stock performance. The Q6600 is better at OC'ing and performance (OC).
March 23, 2009 2:34:04 PM

As already stated, for virtualization, its hands down the Q6600. With the virtualization enhancements and larger cache, the Pentium Quad-Core doesn't have a prayer.

Also, if you have to purchase a motherboard, a PhenomII solution may offer equal or better value.
March 24, 2009 11:11:53 AM

Thanks to your advice, I will now be getting Q6600. Merely because of it's virtualisation capability.

You mentioned PhenomII, does that have hardware virtualisation support?
a b à CPUs
March 24, 2009 8:06:47 PM

Yes, it does with AMD-V
a b à CPUs
March 25, 2009 12:17:29 AM

Now that we are talking about Virtualization, which is better C2Q/i7 or Phenom/Phenom II? I haven't seen many benchmarks/comparisons for VT so I'm not sure. Any one got any solid numbers?
a b à CPUs
March 25, 2009 4:34:59 AM

The general feel is that AMD Phenom II and Core i7 rule the roost with their HT memory links.
April 13, 2009 10:11:15 PM

I say go Q8200, I know that everyone says that q6600 is better for oc but when you see there sigs they usually have it clocked @ 3 or 3.2ghz due to the high voltages required. So yeah a q6600 is a great clocker but a q8200 can do 3ghz and stay cooler while outperforming the q6600 at 3.1-3.2ghz...thats my 2 cents ^^
April 13, 2009 10:50:21 PM

Before few days i choose Asus P5Q (with P45) + Intel Q8200 and it runs very good with many apps, holding the temp. bellow 30 cels.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
May 27, 2009 2:50:14 PM

hehe yes i say go q8200 i have one on gigabit ep45-ud3r and it is very stable now at 3.08 ghz :D  and i am not finish trying it out ... i have zaleman 9500 cpu cooler and cpu is now 52 46 47 47 its idle but if i run prime 95 let my see ...70 65 64 65 it is not wery cold lol but system is working fine .. 73 69 67 68 now :D  i think i have to ingrease the voltage little bit :p 
April 16, 2010 9:26:45 PM

Hi my config is this : MB Asus P5QC ,Intel P 45 ,FSB 1600/1333/800/667 with Intel Core 2 Quad 8200,ram Corsair XMS at 1600 Mhz 2 x 2048 ,video His Radeon 4870 Full HD 256 / 1024 ram DDR 5 at real freqency at 800 / 1482 , power supply Spire 650 Watt PFC active ,about Intel q 8200 proc is the best choice if you don't need to make overclock ,it is stable and it has an easy handling control in order to modify the FSB and ram voltages, The q 8200 has as default 1333 Mhz FSB but with this MB i can increase the FSB easily without any damage to the CPU property,yes its certain that the q 8200 does not support vritualisation but he has much more speed like q 6600,now i m using an Cooler Master Hyper x 2 CPU cooler and the temps inside are 28 - 30 C because the 45 Nm technology is better than q 6600 tech ,and that the CPU stays idle at 62 / 67C with the default cooler. Try to check it out on the net. My personal opinion is that,if you need the default frequency, the Q 8200 is the best choice ,if you need to make an experimental pc with high risk to damage its parts :) ) Q 6600 is the best one, but you need to know more about stepping ,overclock and MB specs in order to play with your CPU .
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2011 1:04:35 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!