6600...Keep Duo or go Quad

toxic · 26 Jul 2007 at 10:19

Anyone gone from a core 2 dual 6600 to a Quad 6600 and noticed any difference. I have my E6600 running at 3.4Ghz...24/7 since purchase....and looking at the effectivemess of the quad...on air ill be lucky if I get 3Ghz. Im using a P35 board....so will have no issues there.

Will I notice any performance improvement at the moment...or will games etc run slower due to the probable lesser single core speed?

Thebug · 26 Jul 2007 at 10:27

just gone from a e6600 to a q6600 and the only diff i have noticed is higher temps, but i suppose it depends on what you use it for.

I had my e6600 running at 3.2 and my quad at 3.2

If you can get a good price for your e6600 then why not upgrade.

Paul11 · 26 Jul 2007 at 13:07

id say its not worth it.. not unless your finding your current cpu slow.

wait a while, what you have is fine and in the near future there will be more options for better upgrades

Deluxe1 · 26 Jul 2007 at 13:18

ive got my e6600 running at the same speed and have been tempted to jump on the quad core bandwagon but im sticking with what ive got for the time being.

Servo · 26 Jul 2007 at 13:38

I've just moved from a e6600 to a q6600, and whilst it's only running @ 3.1 at the moment, it's encodes movies way faster than my e6600 did @ 3.4.

Yes it's worth it.

Deluxe1 · 26 Jul 2007 at 13:50

Servo said:
I've just moved from a e6600 to a q6600, and whilst it's only running @ 3.1 at the moment, it's encodes movies way faster than my e6600 did @ 3.4.

Yes it's worth it.

Yes....if you encode a lot of movies.

toxic · 26 Jul 2007 at 14:25

Mixed results from that question as usuall...LOL

Yes..I do a bit of video conversion...games etc. etc. Anyhow...just ordered one... If I sell my E6600 its not exactly the dearest of upgrades!
Thanks

enigmo · 26 Jul 2007 at 16:21

Similar to Servo, I found a rough halving of encoding times thanks to multithreaded recoding software, but it'll be a long time before it's worth migrating my desktop/games machine to quad core. If all you do is games, leave the quad and get a better chip six months from now. If you are doing some heavy video work, quad is more worthwhile, especially with todays prices.

Craigius · 26 Jul 2007 at 16:30

Servo said:
I've just moved from a e6600 to a q6600, and whilst it's only running @ 3.1 at the moment, it's encodes movies way faster than my e6600 did @ 3.4.

Yes it's worth it.

How much quicker??
could you give an example please. :cool:

Chronictank · 27 Jul 2007 at 11:53

he**.net you cna fill in the blanks

Encoding
http://img.*****.net/v2/cpu/intel/core2quad/WAV.png[.img]
[img]http://img.*****.net/v2/cpu/intel/core2quad/DivXEnhanced.png

3d rendering

Gaming

Overclocking

We didn’t have a refrigeration system to hand, nor the time to install one. But using simple air cooling we were still able to increase the multiplier a couple of notches, merely by adding 0.05V to the core voltage. This gave us a healthy 20 per cent overclock, from 2.66GHz to 3.2GHz,

in short, no unless you do media encoding

Scoobie Dave · 27 Jul 2007 at 11:57

Well I have to say that Vista seems more responsive now with quad for some reason. Feels very slick now and I love it.

As for encoding dvd's and stuff like that it rips em to bits, quite amazing.

For the money now I would say quad is worth the money now, especially if you have a decent cooling setup.

Ozzie Dave · 27 Jul 2007 at 16:13

Video encoding is not the only thing. 3D rendering/modelling apps and anything that uses multiple cores would benefit greatly by going to quad. I plan on doing this myself soon. Having 4 cores instead of 2 means my renders get done in half the time, or thereabouts

Screw games, you won't see hardly anything there for a while at least. Only Supreme Commander and maybe 1 or 2 other games uses multiple cores properly AFAIK....altho it will be a nice bonus when all game devs catch the multicore gravy train eventually

easyrider · 27 Jul 2007 at 16:28

IMO its a no brainer when you can get quad for 165 smackers!

Servo · 27 Jul 2007 at 18:17

Craigius said:
How much quicker??
could you give an example please.

Dvd to divx, 2 pass, insane quality, 26mins including audio conversion. (160-190fps)

Oh, did I say, I blow my motherboard whilst trying to o/c?

Got another Gigabyte (p35) coming tomorrow, I just hope the chip is okay.

Craigius · 27 Jul 2007 at 18:26

Servo said:
Dvd to divx, 2 pass, insane quality, 26mins including audio conversion. (160-190fps)

Oh, did I say, I blow my motherboard whilst trying to o/c?

Got another Gigabyte (p35) coming tomorrow, I just hope the chip is okay.

Thats without overclocking it? :eek:

Servo · 27 Jul 2007 at 18:31

It was overclocked to 3.3

Craigius · 27 Jul 2007 at 18:32

Servo said:
It was overclocked to 3.3

Oh right i see. :cool:

chaparral · 28 Jul 2007 at 15:26

Servo said:
Oh, did I say, I blow my motherboard whilst trying to o/c?

How did you blow your motherboard by overclocking your cpu :confused:

Servo · 28 Jul 2007 at 21:30

chaparral said:
How did you blow your motherboard by overclocking your cpu

lol, it wasn't the overclocking, the motherboard just decided to pack in. Anyway, got the new one fitted, and all seems well.