• 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.

[email protected] to Q6600?

Man of Honour
Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,264
Location
Cotswolds
I currently have an E6300 which I run @ 3.3ghz, is it worth upgrading to a Q6600 (at say 3.4ish)? Will the difference be noticable?
 
I have the same dilemma - E6300 at 3.2 which I'm considering swapping out for a Q6600. I don't do any encoding or rendering really, so the main CPU-intensive tasks my PC does are gaming and Folding@Home. The former doesn't benefit much from quad-core ATM so I'd mainly be seeing an improvement in my F@H score... but I really want to play with one :p
 
i've just changed from an e6700 @ 3.2 to a q6600 @ 3.6. my whole asystem is a lot more responsive. still putting it through it's paces however the price of the q6600 was the final push.

and it knocks spots of my mates same priced amd phenom
 
I went from E6300 @ 2.8 to Q6600 G0 and def noticed it. I dont do encoding but certaintly noticed it in Nero...

Pleased I upgraded....
 
I was going to start another thread on this but as this one is here....

I have an E6600 @ 3.6 and was wondering if it was worth upgrading to quad also. I only really game on this pc so would i personally see any benefits?

I don't really want to "downgrade" and would be happy if i got one that did 3.6ghz as, presumably, even if a game isn't mulitcore enabled i wouldn't see any difference but what are the chances of a new quad doing 3.6ghz?
 
Last edited:
I was going to start another thread on this but as this one is here....

I have an E6600 @ 3.6 and was wondering if it was worth upgrading to quad also. I only really game on this pc so would i personally see any benefits?

I don't really want to "downgrade" and would be happy if i got one that did 3.6ghz as, presumably, even if a game is mulitcore enabled i wouldn't see any difference but what are the chances of a new quad doing 3.6ghz?

A Quad at 3.6 needs decent cooling, depending on what cooloing you currently have it may be a limiting factor.
 
It would be water cooled using my current setup, apogee gt, xspc triple rad swiftech mcp350 pump The only other thing in the loop would be my ocz flex xlc, though i could remove that if needed.
 
It would be water cooled using my current setup, apogee gt, xspc triple rad swiftech mcp350 pump The only other thing in the loop would be my ocz flex xlc, though i could remove that if needed.

Well in that case i would have thought it would be fine.
 
E6300 to Q6600 must be the way to go, I have been wanting to do it for the last couple of weeks now.

Soon as I get some money i'm ordering one.
 
mye6300editqp5.jpg


Thats my 12 month old E6300, did a scan of the IHS before I lapped it. Been running it at 2800MHz (7x400) for pretty much the whole year but just the past few weeks I pushed it up to 3150MHz (7x450) using just 1.35vCore, not sure why I was running it at the slower speed lol?

I always hoped that I could get an E6300 running at 3500MHz but my ASUS P5B-Deluxe was not really up for hitting 500MHz-FSB, anyway . . . .

Changed mobos now to a new P35 chipset and will get some overclocking done during xmas, theres life left in the E6300 yet!

To the other guys owning an E6300 and are thinking of buying Quad-Core I say this . . .

If you want it buy it, you earn your money so you spend it as you please, however I honestly don't think you will notice any differerence from your overclocked E6300's. Ok in benchmarks you will especially 3D-Mark06 and things that take advantage of the extra cores but I have yet to see any real proof that games benefit?

I have looked at getting a Q6600 myself but what I basically want is a chip that can run 3600MHz so I'm considering picking up a used E6400 or most likely a used E6600 and clocking that. Now looking at peoples results it seems 3600MHz on a Q6600 wouldn't be too hard (maybe more maybe less?)

£65 'used' Dual Core @ 3600MHz vs £160 'new' Quad Core @ 3600MHz

Is the extra £100 (approx) worth spending for two additional cores?

If it is then please explain to me because I don't see it myself? :o
 
I have an E6600 @ 3.6 and was wondering if it was worth upgrading to quad also. I only really game on this pc so would i personally see any benefits?
Haha I think thats a real nice chip you have there!

As I just said in my previous post thats the setup I am aiming for, just a slight upgrade from what I already have but you know how it is when you have owned a piece of hardware for a while you start to want something else lol! :D

A 4MB Dual Core running at 3600MHz paired with a tasty Graphics card is certainly all you would need to sit back and enjoy your gaming, I can even do that now running a 2MB Dual Core running at 2800MHz.

If somebody wants to serve up some screenshots or weblinks to reviews where it shows how awesome a Q6600 is in gaming compared to a fast dual core it would be much appreciated :)
 
imo, if you have a core2duo which for most is more than adequte just for games, then it'd be better to wait, unless you don't mind wasting money.

only reason i went straight to quad is becasue i had a athlon xp previous and i new i'd get quad eventually so i just got it, but you already have a dual, so leave it for now i would.
 
only reason i went straight to quad is becasue i had a athlon xp previous and i new i'd get quad eventually so i just got it
Well I see that as two reasons, the one you didn't mention is "I wanted it"

Would you have noticed the difference if instead you went for an E2160 and clocked that to 3200MHz? (and an extra £100 in your wallet).
 
Well I see that as two reasons, the one you didn't mention is "I wanted it"

Would you have noticed the difference if instead you went for an E2160 and clocked that to 3200MHz? (and an extra £100 in your wallet).

well no becasue i would have got a q6600 probly in like a years time anyway from when i got it (plus e2xxx wernt out when i got it) so why pay for two cpu's?

also when i bought it i wasnt going to overclock due to lack of experience etc... being my frst build, but then i couldnt resist in the end.
 
well no becasue i would have got a q6600 probly in like a years time anyway from when i got it (plus e2xxx wernt out when i got it) so why pay for two cpu's?
It may be be the case that a quad core would have been a better purchase in a years time, I mean its pretty good now but I would like to see more software really making use out of the extra cores.

If the E21xx series weren't out there was always the E4xxx series.

Sounds like you had your quad a while? how much did you pay if you don't mind me asking?

also when i bought it i wasnt going to overclock due to lack of experience etc... being my frst build, but then i couldnt resist in the end.
Aye its the same for all of us, terrible habit! :D

Now if you say you bought the Quad because "you wanted it" then I can say no more, but if you say "I bought the quad because of reasons XYZ" then we can chatter away further because I wanna know what "XYZ" reasons are?
 
Back
Top Bottom