What is better? q6600 or q8300?

[Guest]

what is better the q6600 or the q8300?

i know that the q6600 has more l2 cache but the 8300 is cheaper atm so im confused.

 

[Kraynor]

It depends. What are you using the system for? Will you be overclocking?

 

[Guest]

yes, i will be ocing.

 

[Kraynor]

In that case I'd recommend the Q6600, the greater cache along with it's legendary overclocking ability will serve you brilliantly. Just make sure you get a high quality cooler and thermal paste, and you'll be seeing 3.2, 3.4, or even 3.6 GHz from it.

 

[cjl]

I would actually go for the 8300. It overclocks quite well too, and it will run cooler and use less power at a given clock speed than the 6600. It's cheaper too.

 

[Kraynor]

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/page-259134_10_0.html
Just found this thread, exact same question asked before, seems the Q6600 was the favourite back then too.

The 8300 will run marginally cooler but with a decent HSF that's not much of a bonus, my Q6600 (B3, not the cooler G0) sits at about 30 degrees idle at 3.2 GHz with an S-1283. I'd still say the double cache size on the Q6600 makes it the winner in my books. As for power usage, not many overclockers would be worried about a few more watts being used.

 

[Guest]

hmm.. ok so what kind of cooler should i get for it?

 

[Kraynor]

http://www.frostytech.com <== take your pick, they're pretty spot on when it comes to cooler ratings

 

[zedx]

Don't forget that the Q8300 supports SSE4. So if you are going to compile stuff(which I doubt but you might in future) then Q8300 will be much faster . Here's a review of Q8300's overclockability http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/core_2_quad_q8300_review/15.html so it can go till 3.4 ghz but should run well enough in around 3 ghz

If you don't care about SSE 4 and want something which oc's well and runs games fast than you should definately consider the Phenom II 940 if you can.

 

[B-Unit]

I cant belive this is still debatable. The Q6600 owns the 'Pentium Quad-Core' in every frakin way.

And dont be fooled, its just 2 E5200 cores glued to gether to get that lovely Q8300. Doubling your dies doesnt count as a promotion to Core2 in my book.

 

[V-force]

Intel was always playing games. Remember back then when she was just raising the P4's MHz just for a few more FPS? and AMD was trying really hard to keep up?
Now we have the same situation with intel combining two low end CPUs to create Q6600. I recommend AMD PHENOM II X4 920. Native quad-core CPU, 6MB L3cash, very good energy saving, excellent overclocker.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-ii-x4-920-overclocking_4.html#sect0

DO NOT listen what they say about overclocking. If you are playing games in a normal monitor (1280x1024) and you have decided to OC your CPU and VGA you will probably have a good gain in FPS.
But if you don't have a good hardware combination it gives you nothing in heavy games when having anti-alising, maximum quality and maximum resolusion (crysis, Quake Wars, stalker clearSky...).
Overclocking your PC will surely give you a lot of speed in apllications, but as for games you can't tell for sure.
Oveclocking even the big boys sometimes dosen't do much difference in gaming

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/xfx-gf-gtx285-gtx295_13.html#sect2

 

[cjl]

I cant belive this is still debatable. The Q6600 owns the 'Pentium Quad-Core' in every frakin way.

And dont be fooled, its just 2 E5200 cores glued to gether to get that lovely Q8300. Doubling your dies doesnt count as a promotion to Core2 in my book.

The E5200 is a core 2 architecture CPU. Don't be fooled by the Pentium name - it is exactly the same die as the E8600, but at a lower clock speed and with some of the cache disabled.

Oh, and honestly, I would say the 8300 is just as overclockable as the 6600 as long as your board can handle high FSB. Get a good P45 board or similar, and it'll overclock just fine. Go for the 8300.

 

[B-Unit]

The E5200 is a core 2 architecture CPU. Don't be fooled by the Pentium name - it is exactly the same die as the E8600, but at a lower clock speed and with [strike]some[/strike]most of the cache disabled.
...

Fixd

Q9x50 or death!

 

[cjl]

Fixd

Q9x50 or death!

You realize that the Q8000 series actually outperforms the 6600 in almost every way (aside from virtualization), right? Admittedly, the performance advantage is small, but it is there, and at a lower power usage too. Yes, the 9000 series is better still, but for those on a budget, the 8000 series is an excellent choice, and definitely worth the price.