Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dilema E8500 or Q8200

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 24, 2009 4:33:57 PM

Hi everybody,
Recently I've got the option to change my Q8200 2.33ghz for a E8500 3.16ghz, I can't make my mind on this so I'm asking...

My PC is just a game station, I do my work on it but nothing demanding just big worksheets and databases.
I play all recent games (FPS, RTS, Driving, etc) and I'm willing to overclock (q8200 is overclocked to 2.8Ghz and doesn't give much room to further OC).

My set up is:
Mobo: Foxconn Mars
PSU: Ultra lifetime series 750W
Cooler: Tuniq tower 120
GPU: ATI 4850x2
Ram : Kingston 2GBx2 800mhz
OS: Vista ultimate 64x
Case: Ultra something (dont remenber) Modded to exhaust GPU heat.

I dont have money to purchase a new cpu at the moment, so I was thinking about this trade.

Will my 4850x2 work better with E8500? I just care about gaming performance.

Thanks in advance for opinions!

More about : dilema e8500 q8200

April 24, 2009 4:55:24 PM

For anything but GTA IV you would probably see better FPS with an overclocked E8500 but I would venture to guess that many games will soon be better optimized for more cores.
April 24, 2009 5:23:36 PM

i have the same dilemma too. im looking to upgrade my e4600 to either an e8400 or q8200. yeah i play gta 4, and right now, it killing my computer. but i play a lot of other games too other than gta4. l4d, cod5, grid, company of heroes, cyrsis. im choosing between these two because they have almost the same price. i do casual photo editing and movies. those are just the things i do in my pc. other than surfing ofcourse. so which processor is for me? i dont plan to oc because my board doesnt allow it.

mobo: intel DG31PR
ram: 4gb ddr2 800
vc: 9800gt 1gb

need suggestions...
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b à CPUs
April 24, 2009 5:39:16 PM

I was in your shoes last year, debating between the e8400 and a quad core. I've been completely happy with the e8400 and given a choice like yours today I'd go with the e8500. There are so many reviews that show the e8000 series are much better value for gaming and overclocking.
April 24, 2009 5:52:24 PM

+1 for the E8500. It's going to be better for gaming.

The quad would be better for encoding and multi-tasking in many areas, but for games, I'd stick with the E8500.

April 24, 2009 5:53:13 PM

why is it better for gaming? my cousin said that too. so what does the 4 cores do??
April 24, 2009 6:03:29 PM

E8400/E8500 -- if you're only gaming the faster speed per core will improve your performance. With the quad you'll still be slower even if you overclock to 2.8 and then you get all the excess heat/power/etc from the 2 cores that you won't be using.

Current games are hardly optimized for 2 cores, none that matter for more cores than that. Speed is your best performance enhancer here.
April 24, 2009 7:07:16 PM

hardwaretechy said:
E8400/E8500 -- if you're only gaming the faster speed per core will improve your performance. With the quad you'll still be slower even if you overclock to 2.8 and then you get all the excess heat/power/etc from the 2 cores that you won't be using.

Current games are hardly optimized for 2 cores, none that matter for more cores than that. Speed is your best performance enhancer here.


Thanks for the clear comment about gaming, that was what I was looking for.

I might be upgrading my pc next year so I should disregard those comments of "downgrading" to C2D (comments from my friends, not here).

I think I almost make up my mind, but 5mins ago I received a new option q6600, most likely I'm changing my Q8200 to a different CPU and I know general concensus is Q6600 over Q8200 for gaming (many many topics and comments saying that).

So base on my motherboard (Foxconn mars) which option would be better E8500 or Q6600? their temps are around the same level when overclocked arent they? If we go with pure speed (when overclocked) would E8500 be the best option?

Thanks!
a b à CPUs
April 24, 2009 7:50:45 PM

I dont see why you cant get but a 500 mhz overclock
April 24, 2009 8:00:39 PM

BadTrip said:
I dont see why you cant get but a 500 mhz overclock


Q8200 stock 333*7= 2.33ghz, oc'd 400*7=2.8Ghz, since my ram is only 800mhz and overclocks really bad, that's the safest and easiest OC i can get.

I have tried 428*7=3.0ghz and it runs ok for a few hours, then it becomes unstable.

At 2.8Ghz is 20% OC and at 3.0ghz is 30% oc. At 1600fsb I can get 3.6ghz on a q6600, and thats because the 7x multiplier on the Q8200 sucks for OC.

that is why.
April 24, 2009 8:27:33 PM

I think you should do it. At least you can OC more E8500 where with Q8200 you are already stuck to 2.8 Ghz, let's say 3. So go for it. Next time you should think more before you buy. You should look for something more "future proof".
April 24, 2009 8:39:18 PM

You're right, I rushed my decision with this Q8200.

I thought q8200 was future proof, it actually might be, but not for my needs.

Hopefully I will improve the performance with either of the new options.

Thanks!
April 24, 2009 8:40:50 PM

Go for q6600.Overclock it to 3.2(400x8) or 3.6(400x9)GHz, I have mine @3.2GHz and cannot be happier. It will do 3.6 as well but due to heat and and no real neeed to go higher I leave it @3.2
!