-
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.
E6600 (with another 2 gig ram) or stick with the X6800
- Thread starter agnes
- Start date
Sell sell sell
The E6600 is practically guaranteed to do 3.6Ghz+ under water so you won't notice a performance decrease compared to your x6800. The main difference to your rig would be the added benefit of having 2GB of extra system ram. The E6600 will also hold its resale value a lot better than a x6800.
The E6600 is practically guaranteed to do 3.6Ghz+ under water so you won't notice a performance decrease compared to your x6800. The main difference to your rig would be the added benefit of having 2GB of extra system ram. The E6600 will also hold its resale value a lot better than a x6800.
Under water, I would get a E6600. Sell the X6800.
Another option is to sell the X6800 and get a Q6600 if you want to go down the quad core route which will give you the longer cpu lifespan really. You wouldnt have to upgrade for a long time.
Another option is to sell the X6800 and get a Q6600 if you want to go down the quad core route which will give you the longer cpu lifespan really. You wouldnt have to upgrade for a long time.
ok, well the rigs down atm, but i did have the 6800 at 3.6 (only had it up for around 6 hours, then had a watercooling prob which is getting worted at friday)
as for the 64bit part, i will be runing xp 32bit (if i can get hold of a 64 bit xp pro disk, then 64)
at the moment though, im thinking sell the x6800 and get the extra 2 gig of ram and get the E6600
btw, the 2 gig i got now and the extra 2 gig will be - clicky
agnes
p.s. quad is a no no for me, i dont see the point of it until more games support it.
as for the 64bit part, i will be runing xp 32bit (if i can get hold of a 64 bit xp pro disk, then 64)
at the moment though, im thinking sell the x6800 and get the extra 2 gig of ram and get the E6600
btw, the 2 gig i got now and the extra 2 gig will be - clicky
agnes
p.s. quad is a no no for me, i dont see the point of it until more games support it.
agnes said:ok, well the rigs down atm, but i did have the 6800 at 3.6 (only had it up for around 6 hours, then had a watercooling prob which is getting worted at friday)
as for the 64bit part, i will be runing xp 32bit (if i can get hold of a 64 bit xp pro disk, then 64)
at the moment though, im thinking sell the x6800 and get the extra 2 gig of ram and get the E6600
btw, the 2 gig i got now and the extra 2 gig will be - clicky
agnes
p.s. quad is a no no for me, i dont see the point of it until more games support it.
Yeah, that seems the best choice, although you could always decide on getting some cheaper ram, but that's your choice. An E6600 at 3.6 should last quite a while to be honest, and when you need upgrading, quad core will be a lot more useful.
well you see, this is the dilema which spurred the post at the start, if i retunred the x6800 i could get the full price back and afford that extra 2 gig and the E6600 as a replacement, so either wy, money isnt being spent.
one thought coursed my mind, when crysis comes out along with assassins creed and all those other long view lush games, the 4gig of ram will show through well me thinks, and the E6600 will be just as good as the X6800, even better because i will have that extra 2 gig.
and those games will not be using 4 cores, so there is no point. hense why im not bothering with quad.
ags
one thought coursed my mind, when crysis comes out along with assassins creed and all those other long view lush games, the 4gig of ram will show through well me thinks, and the E6600 will be just as good as the X6800, even better because i will have that extra 2 gig.
and those games will not be using 4 cores, so there is no point. hense why im not bothering with quad.
ags
Well tbh looking at your sig there isnt much more apart from a quad core cpu which you dont want that you can upgrade to 
Take the X6800 back and get yourself a E6600 and why not got some more Corsair C3's
As you say, more money isnt getting spent.
Take the X6800 back and get yourself a E6600 and why not got some more Corsair C3's
As you say, more money isnt getting spent.
aye
ill do it, thanks guys
cannie wait to have 4 gig of some serious ram
ill post some speeds and overclocks of both the ram and cpu clock speeds when i get it all up n running
ags
thanks again
EDIT: ill be clocking the ram to about 1100mhz, and the cpu to 3.5 (over that is useless)
ill do it, thanks guys
cannie wait to have 4 gig of some serious ram
ill post some speeds and overclocks of both the ram and cpu clock speeds when i get it all up n running
ags
thanks again
EDIT: ill be clocking the ram to about 1100mhz, and the cpu to 3.5 (over that is useless)
agnes said:aye
ill do it, thanks guys
cannie wait to have 4 gig of some serious ram
ill post some speeds and overclocks of both the ram and cpu clock speeds when i get it all up n running
ags
thanks again
EDIT: ill be clocking the ram to about 1100mhz, and the cpu to 3.5 (over that is useless)
If you are using 32 bit Win XP then it can only use 2GB for system and 2GB for applications, so 4GB is a waste, as it will never actually use all the system memory.
If you have the 64 bit version or Vista then the RAM should be used propelry....if it's actually needed by anythuing.
S
I'd agree, unless you plan on using xp 64 or vista 64 then 4 gig would most likely be a waste. I've read that vista 32 can address up to 4 gig, but that includes your video memory which in your case will be 1.5GB of ram. Not sure if XP 32 is the same as this. Why not splash out on vista 64 while you're at it. Then your 4GB of ram would be useful
