Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Q8300 vs q6600 vs q8400 for gaming

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 23, 2010 6:44:06 AM

hey Guyz which is the best for gaming out of these 3. For gaming

q8300
q6600
q8400

And how to determine whether it is good for gaming should u see cache or clock speed

q6600 has a very good cache 8mb, the other two has 4mb.....

So which is the best for gaming

reply
a c 133 à CPUs
April 23, 2010 7:29:09 AM

Are you upgrading a current socket 775 board?

Out of the 3 you picked here I would say the Q8400 but IMO I wouldnt pick any of those Q9550 or Q9650 would be the only socket 775 CPU's I would even consider but they tend to run really expensive. The Q6600 is a little old it runs on 65nm tech and will be a little slower then the 45nm counterparts. Q8300 and 8400 are fair at best their stock clocks are really a little low for good gaming at 2.5 and 2.66ghz. If you already have a board and it can be overclocked then the Q8400 will perform fairly decent if you OC to 3.2 3.4ghz which is very doable with those chips but those chips cost so much since socket 775 is dead. If you look at the cost of those chips and see it will cost almost $200 for one then it is not worth it you would be able to get an AMD motherboard and Processor that will perform just as well if not better and will leave plenty of options for upgrade.


m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 23, 2010 8:42:21 AM

hijaz said:
hey Guyz which is the best for gaming out of these 3. For gaming

q8300
q6600
q8400

And how to determine whether it is good for gaming should u see cache or clock speed

q6600 has a very good cache 8mb, the other two has 4mb.....

So which is the best for gaming

reply

the q6600 is nearly extinct. Not much future left for that.
If you strictly have only those 3 options, then go with the q8400.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
April 23, 2010 9:16:22 AM

The Core™ 2 Quad Q6600 is old, based on the 65nm instead of the Q8000's 45nm, but it still slightly outperforms both of them clock for clock in some games due to their lack of cache. If you do plan to overclock, I'm pretty sure the Q6600 will go further - you'd think that it being 65nm holds it back, but the Q8000 series do not overclock well. If you do not plan on overclocking, then get the Q8400 instead. If you live near a Micro Center, you can pick up a Q9550 for $169.99 - the price of a Q8400 which has 8MB less L2 cache and is 166MHz slower.

Although you'd probably be better off with a Phenom II & DDR2 motherboard combo, so you can reuse everything else in your current system.


m
0
l

Best solution

a c 133 à CPUs
April 23, 2010 2:14:37 PM

Lmeow said:
The Core™ 2 Quad Q6600 is old, based on the 65nm instead of the Q8000's 45nm, but it still slightly outperforms both of them clock for clock in some games due to their lack of cache. If you do plan to overclock, I'm pretty sure the Q6600 will go further - you'd think that it being 65nm holds it back, but the Q8000 series do not overclock well. If you do not plan on overclocking, then get the Q8400 instead. If you live near a Micro Center, you can pick up a Q9550 for $169.99 - the price of a Q8400 which has 8MB less L2 cache and is 166MHz slower.

Although you'd probably be better off with a Phenom II & DDR2 motherboard combo, so you can reuse everything else in your current system.


The Q8400 will overclock about just as well as the Q6600 its really only the Q8200 which is bad overclocker but even that can reach 3.1 3.2 ghz. The Q8300 and 8400 get a little better performance with a little higher multipliers. The Q8400 at 3.2 ghz will be like a Q6600 at 3.5 ghz the extra cache may help a little but the yorkfield quads are faster.
------------------------------
Share
April 23, 2010 3:34:53 PM

Best answer selected by hijaz.
m
0
l
!