CPU CHOICE.... HELP NEEDED !!!!!

bugnotme · 26 Jun 2008 at 21:43

shall i choose

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 2.66GHz S775 - Around £155

OR

Intel Quad Core Q6600 2.4GHz S775 - Around £125

I am lookin for the one which gives the most bang for the buck, also i will be overclocking the cpu.

OLDPHART · 26 Jun 2008 at 21:49

I’ve just set up a new build using a [email protected] no sweat.

reflux · 26 Jun 2008 at 21:50

Q6600....it's not really worth going for the Q6700 unless you really, really need that higher multiplier.

bugnotme · 26 Jun 2008 at 21:51

sorry, what does the multiplier allow me to do

Pneumonic · 26 Jun 2008 at 22:19

Q6600 everytime

CPU clock speed is a factor of FSB and Multiplier... i.e. 400 * 8 gives you 3.2ghz therefore a higher multiplier should give you more room for overclocking.. but in regards to those 2 CPU's the Q6600 with clock to 3.2 easy, 3.6 if you get a 1/2 decent one with average cooling and higher with high end cooling.. the Q6600 also runs on less power and heat is your major enemy when clocking a CPU.. so with less heat output you can clock it further before it starts to get to hot

iMacMart · 26 Jun 2008 at 22:29

Pneumonic do you run the Q6600 at 4.02ghz all the time on air mate?

I brought webbo's 4.10ghz Q6600 and have a tuniq tower 120 as my cooler...

Chip should be in and running by Monday as I'm away this weekend...

Just thought i'd ask

Pneumonic · 26 Jun 2008 at 22:34

I did for a bit but its not your "normal" air setup

I run @ 3.725 24/7 atm as I done need a huge amount of vcore for that and temps are sensible at low fan speeds.. Also tbh day-to-day you probably dont notice any difference over 3.2/3.4, only place you notice it is in benching and e-pen

unclepablo · 26 Jun 2008 at 22:43

IMO No reason to spend extra for Q6700 unless you need extra 0.5 on multiplier - hint, you don't

Tuvoc · 28 Jun 2008 at 22:33

unclepablo said:
IMO No reason to spend extra for Q6700 unless you need extra 0.5 on multiplier - hint, you don't

It's actually an extra 1.0 on the multiplier

Q6600 = 266 x 9 = 2.4
Q6700 = 266 x 10 = 2.66

Pneumonic · 28 Jun 2008 at 23:01

yeah but with a 1/2 decent p35/p45 board you dont need it... also someone correct me if I am wrong but the Q6700 are all B3? or from what I have seen and therefore clock worse than a Q6600...

Tuvoc · 28 Jun 2008 at 23:11

No, Q6700 are all G0

QX6700 Extreme are all B3

Agreed, if you have a good motherboard you almost certainly don't "need" the 10 multiplier. I would just get the Q6600 and put the money saved towards other components

Pneumonic · 28 Jun 2008 at 23:15

ah I standard corrected

anyways Q6600 is the one you want

WDeranged · 29 Jun 2008 at 00:51

I've got a Q6600 thats been sitting happily at 3.6GHz for almost a year, good stuff and now they're cheap as

geekyEd · 29 Jun 2008 at 10:21

Unless you can get a cheap Q6700, they are binned higher so will overclock higher in theory.

lopkinfop · 29 Jun 2008 at 14:48

s1ick said:
Unless you can get a cheap Q6700, they are binned higher so will overclock higher in theory.

but as people have said above there will be little difference, and as the OP is going for best bang for buck then a q6600 would be the better choice

kylew · 29 Jun 2008 at 22:46

A Q6600 will be plenty enough, BUT the bit extra for the multiplier of 10 might be worth it depending on how much of an overclock you want.

It'd easier to overclock a CPU with a higher multiplier and you generally get a higher overclock due to the FSB not being as strained.

But the Q6600s are pretty good clockers anyway. My Q6600 can clock to 4GHz on air and is stable.

Off topic, but does anyone know if there are any QX6700s that are G0s? I might be able to get one for about £150 but I'd want a G0 instead of a B3 as I've heard they get pretty hot and are less overclockable?

p4radox · 29 Jun 2008 at 22:52

Definitely the Q6600. The Q6700 is obsolete to anyone who knows how to overclock.

kylew · 29 Jun 2008 at 22:57

p4radox said:
Definitely the Q6600. The Q6700 is obsolete to anyone who knows how to overclock.

I have a Q6600 that clocks to 4Ghz on air, surely a Q6700 would be able to do better due to the multi? That's why the QX chips clock better because you have the option of putting the multi up.

Tuvoc · 29 Jun 2008 at 23:03

kylew said:
Off topic, but does anyone know if there are any QX6700s that are G0s? I might be able to get one for about £150 but I'd want a G0 instead of a B3 as I've heard they get pretty hot and are less overclockable?

I'm pretty sure they are all B3. I have one

The B3 stepping overclock about the same as G0 as far as I know, provided that you can keep the heat under control. And the unlocked multiplier means that you don't have to push your board too hard. But I see no reason to buy one now over a G0 Q6600.

Big.Wayne · 29 Jun 2008 at 23:08

Pneumonic said:
Q6600 everytime

No!

Q6600 for those wanting a quad core on a budget, preferably bought second hand for maximum bang for buck.

Q9450 for those wanting INTEL's latest and greatest Quad Core tech and who won't be upgrading for a wee while! :cool:

bugnotme: If you don't need a Quad-Core consider a Wolfdale dual-core (E7200, E8200, E8400).