• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AnandTech finally have Benchies for q6600 vs E6850

Meds

Meds

Meds

Associate
Joined
20 Oct 2004
Posts
650
Location
London
Hi All,

As the title says, just thought i'd let you guys know for anyone thats interested.

It was a decision that plagued my life for the past 2 weeks, bought the E6850 in the end tho.
 
BeatMaster said:
E6850 vs Q6700 = Q6700 on par in games but edges ahead in everything else :)

Therefore, a Q6600 overclocked would be the best choice I reckon.
Click to expand...
:D now that's what i want to hear, a clear instruction of "get q6600".

hearing quad's are hard to overclock, is it possible to hit 3Ghz on a cheap version of the Zalman aero flower (the 9500) with acceptable temperature?
 
My spider senses keep saying..... E6750 ......E6750. I think it should be a reasonable choice. Have seen them around for £120 so far being the cheapest.
 
LewisStuart said:
Whats the price going to be on the Q6600 come 22nd?

From XE 266.00USD = 130.595GBP


£131 + vat & del ... is that right?
Click to expand...


Will be around £170 to £180 inc VAT is my guess.
 
Interesting what is says about the E6850 vs the Q6600.

The 6850 dual core wins on games due to the higher clock speed. The 6600 wins on 3D and encoding due to the cores.

I guess you can overclock the 6600 much higher but then you could argue you can overclock the 6850 even higher!
 
I think i may stay with just a dual core because of the extra power consumption of a quad....
(MY electric bill for PC usage is getting higher and higher every year with every PC upgrade i seem to do)
 
chaparral said:
I think i may stay with just a dual core because of the extra power consumption of a quad....
(MY electric bill for PC usage is getting higher and higher every year with every PC upgrade i seem to do)
Click to expand...

how much more would it cost in power consumption to run a quad over a dual core ?
 
humax said:
how much more would it cost in power consumption to run a quad over a dual core ?
Click to expand...
Am not so much worryed about the extra power of just the dual vs quad...It's more to do with went you add everything together....

Am guessing i would be about 300+watts at idle with a quad
(am at 254watts at idle with my daul core setup right now,not counting my monitor, speakers etc)
 
Last edited:
The Half Life 2 frame rates put the E6850 in the lead by quite a margin (around 20fps), but the game is still single-threaded. I'd hazard a guess that when the source engine update released later this year appears, with support for multiple cores, that the Q6600 will make a complete turnaround and destroy it. :p
 
Yes, of course. Regardless, I'd still expect the gap in that particular benchmark score to be closed noticeably. We shall see.
 
The E6850 seems to be just like the old E6600s. With the newer E6600s not clocking very well.

I was lucky enough to buy my E6600 when they were a month or 2 old. Although I did pay nearly £250.
 
BeatMaster said:
Makes an interesting read and it seems that:

E6850 vs Q6700 = Q6700 on par in games but edges ahead in everything else :)
Click to expand...
Err, what review were you reading? Not the same one I was obviously!

Firstly, it's the Q6600 they were testing, not the Q6700. Secondly, the E6850 was clearly superior in virtually all the games, not just on a par. The Q6600 only really showed an advantage in heavy computational stuff like 3D rendering or encoding. Hell, even the multi-core optimised Supreme Commander was faster on the E6850!
Therefore, a Q6600 overclocked would be the best choice I reckon.
Click to expand...
Against an overclocked E6850? You might reach 3Ghz with the Q6600 but then you might reach 3.6Ghz with the E6850.

Much as AMD like to pour scorn on Intel's "fake" quad-cores (i.e. twin dual-cores), there is some truth in their claims. Not only does all main memory access have to go across the FSB, it has to cope with all communication between the two dual-cores too. Not only do apps have to be optimised to make use of the four cores but they also have to have relatively light memory bandwidth requirements to benefit properly too. Anything which relies on heavy memory usage, such as most games, will have problems benefitting fully from a quad core. This is where Barcelona could score as it's a "proper" quad-core design which isn't hampered by the FSB for main memory access.

The E6850 is clearly the better option unless you're doing rendering or encoding, or simply want to brag about having a quad-core.
 
Last edited:
Why is lost planet so much faster with a quad compared to any them other games tested ???? :confused:

About 50% increase in fps by having a quad at 3ghz compared to a dual core at 3ghz..

15134.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom