• 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

Vertigo1 said:
The E6850 is clearly the better option unless you're doing rendering or encoding, or simply want to brag about having a quad-core.
Click to expand...

Some of us academics who can easily use many cores will take the quad core over the E6850 anyday, i.e. like myself. Some of the data analysis I do already brings 2 cores to a halt and seeing it in action on a quad core significantly increases computations.

I'd rather have 4 cores at 2.x ghz than 2 at 3ghz.
 
Nice Review. :)

E6850 for me, i would rather wait that bit longer when Quad is actually productive enough to buy what ever the price.

Most people who are getting Quad = Oh oh look at me ive got a Quad. :p

Native Quad Cores for me. ;)
 
There is nothing in it for in the q6600 vs E6850 debate.

Just waiting for the price reduction to come into effect in the UK all my other components are here waiting.

Im hoping for really big improvements from this new rig compared to what Im curently runnin (in my sig)

I have a p35DS3P, 2gb OCZ Reaper 8500, 8800gts640, Enermax720 PSU and will have a Q6600 asap. GPU and CPU will be water cooled by the current equipment.

If this lot doesnt at least quadruple my benchies Im gona throw myself from a very large building! :D
 
i would imagine a quad core will have a longer life span in terms of being able to keep up with technology as when games all start becoming quad core enabled people with the quads will be cruising along where as those with the duels will have to keep clocking higher and higher. Then ill just upgrade to native when my Q6600 is being outpaced by the native cores to much.
 
8igdave said:
i would imagine a quad core will have a longer life span in terms of being able to keep up with technology as when games all start becoming quad core enabled people with the quads will be cruising along where as those with the duels will have to keep clocking higher and higher. Then ill just upgrade to native when my Q6600 is being outpaced by the native cores to much.
Click to expand...

By the time games do take fully advantage of Quad their will be Native Quad Cores out.

Buying a Quad and then buying a Native Quad is just silly to be honest.
 
Games coming out now are already starting to be able to be run on quads. Why do i need native quad core when im sure a clocked Q6600 will run them perfectly fine and will be cheaper?

I believe crysis will also be quad enabled? Im sure tat would run better on the Q6600 if it is.
 
I was implying years into the future. Your telling me not to get a Q6600 because i plan to get a native in a year or 2. I gues i didn't make it clear.

Because thats like saying dont buy a G80 because you plan on buying a G12550 in a few years :)



:EDIT: i think your being picky tbh. Seens as i said when outpaced. Implying its worth while to upgrade in the second quote. In the first quote im saying why would i need a native if Q6600 is working fine. Therefore youve proved only that i plan on upgrading to a native when my Q6600 is no longer sufficient.
 
chaparral said:
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
Click to expand...


That was a good point that you raised and I hope that it can be answered as I'm just a little confused as to where to spend my cash. I can't make an argument for encoding, as I do too little of it, but *if* the above graph, showing the difference between the quad and dual core, can be explained by the difference in the number of cores then maybe there is some value in investing in one now...???

I assume that if the Q6600 was ran at 3GHz it too would show similar performance to that of the QX6850.....???
 
8igdave said:
I was implying years into the future. Your telling me not to get a Q6600 because i plan to get a native in a year or 2. I gues i didn't make it clear.

Because thats like saying dont buy a G80 because you plan on buying a G12550 in a few years :)
Click to expand...

I think i misunderstood you 8igdave :p .

When you said Native i was thinking as soon as the Native Quad cores come out :p

My bad. ;)
 
stickroad said:
By the time games do take fully advantage of Quad their will be Native Quad Cores out.

Buying a Quad and then buying a Native Quad is just silly to be honest.
Click to expand...

I have to differ a slight bit here as I dont see the difference bettween buying duo now then native quad or quad now then native quad. This is of course going by the 22nd prices as no difference in price = no difference in silliness.

PS Sorry to disagree! :)
 
will the native quad cores (when they turn up) fit in to the same mbrds as the dual cores ?



ie, if one got a 6850 now, could you just drop in one of the true quads in the future ??? ?
 
Paulus said:
will the native quad cores (when they turn up) fit in to the same mbrds as the dual cores ?



ie, if one got a 6850 now, could you just drop in one of the true quads in the future ??? ?
Click to expand...


In the P35 boards i beleive you can.


@ stickroad No problemo homeio :P hahaha (i was not calling you a homo btw)
 
Vimes said:
That was a good point that you raised and I hope that it can be answered as I'm just a little confused as to where to spend my cash. I can't make an argument for encoding, as I do too little of it, but *if* the above graph, showing the difference between the quad and dual core, can be explained by the difference in the number of cores then maybe there is some value in investing in one now...???

I assume that if the Q6600 was ran at 3GHz it too would show similar performance to that of the QX6850.....???
Click to expand...



I beleive they are all technically the same chip and therefore both being run at the same GHZ would give same results i think.

However, the QX could be overclocked far higher then 3ghz.
 
8igdave said:
I believe they are all technically the same chip and therefore both being run at the same GHZ would give same results i think.

However, the QX could be overclocked far higher then 3ghz.
Click to expand...

I thought that they should offer the same performance when ran at the same speed, but I wasn't sure :)

Then again I have just read this, within the OP's linked article...

If you're strictly building a gaming box, you'll get more performance out of the dual-core E6850. However, if you do any encoding or 3D rendering at all, the quad-core Q6600 is a better buy. Our pick is the Q6600 and if you want to make up the performance difference you can always overclock to E6850 speeds, but the chip only makes sense if you're running apps that can take advantage of four cores

Taken specifically from here...

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=8

You can also notice, from the graph, that the games tested performed better on the dual core system, apart from the Lost Planet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom