is it worth upgrading my e6600 to a quad core e6600? (both are 2.4ghz)

[Marku]

got my e6600 overclocked to 3ghz atm (it can run get around 3.1/3.2ghz ish but prefer to keep temp/voltage down for stability).

i got games like far cry 2, ETW, NTW, will be getting mafia 2, got dragonage, COD games, sims 3 etc etc

 

[Indy500]

Not for those games no.

 

[cmndr_andi]

TBH, I would. You can buy a Q6600 (G0 version) for ~£80 and sell on your E6600 for ~£40 - so the upgrade will cost you around £40.

Modern games do seem to be making increased use of multi-core CPUs. Worst case, it will run as fast as before, best case - it will run significantly faster. It will also mean you can play games like gta4 that pretty much require a multi-core CPU to work well.

 

[Indy500]

TBH, I would. You can buy a Q6600 (G0 version) for ~£80 and sell on your E6600 for ~£40 - so the upgrade will cost you around £40.

I don't recommend upgrades based on assumptions.

Modern games do seem to be making increased use of multi-core CPUs. Worst case, it will run as fast as before, best case - it will run significantly faster. It will also mean you can play games like gta4 that pretty much require a multi-core CPU to work well.

The Core 2 E6600 is a multicore CPU. Unless you think a quadcore is the baseline for acceptable gaming, which is nonsense. I didn't see the OP mention GTA4 anywhere. I have a 3Ghz dual core CPU like Marku and I haven't noticed any problems in 99% of games.

Feel free to demonstrate why the Q6600 is a good upgrade here for the games actually mentioned and I'll withdraw my skepticism.

 

[cmndr_andi]

Ok, well my suggestion is not based on assumptions but experience and research, but you are right - I should have provided some evidence why it is worth the £40.

You are quite right, some of the games listed in the OP will see little to no benefit with a quad core, these include ETW, NTW, COD


If you look at this benchmark, the Q6600 is faster than the (faster clocked E6750) in Far Cry 2 (on of the games mentioned), due to the threaded nature of the game.

Dragon Age also sees significant gains with more cores.

For the Sims 3 there is a boost for going with a quad- but it isn't massive.

As for Mafia 2, I have no clue - I await some in-depth reviews after the release date.

But generally the trend is to use more cores in games. Many of the current crop of games are multi platform and often they are very similar to the XBox 360 versions. As the 360 has a tri-core CPU, these games are usually written with that in mind and often this leaks into the PC port.

As for "multi-core", I realise there is no industry standard for what it mean, so we are both right. But my definition is a CPU with 3 or more cores onboard (and not a many-core). I usually don't term 2 core CPUs as multicore as the term "dual-core" is so ubiquitous these days.

When I mentioned GTA4, I meant it as an example of a game that basically requires a quad core to play. Others include ARMAII and Battlefield Bad Company 2. Since the OP did say "etc etc" I don't think its out of order to suggest other games than the ones mentioned in the first post.

 

[Redmint]

Dragon Age also sees significant gains with more cores.

Agree on this one, I can see DA using my Q6600 quite nicely when I'm running any kind of CPU monitoring while playing.

 

[Indy500]

Ok, well my suggestion is not based on assumptions but experience and research, but you are right - I should have provided some evidence why it is worth the £40.

You were referring to members market deals, which aren't as static as store prices, same goes for availability. In retail the cost is sky-high because there are so few left.

You are quite right, some of the games listed in the OP will see little to no benefit with a quad core, these include ETW, NTW, COD

If you look at this benchmark, the Q6600 is faster than the (faster clocked E6750) in Far Cry 2 (on of the games mentioned), due to the threaded nature of the game.

Dragon Age also sees significant gains with more cores.

For the Sims 3 there is a boost for going with a quad- but it isn't massive.

As for Mafia 2, I have no clue - I await some in-depth reviews after the release date.

But generally the trend is to use more cores in games. Many of the current crop of games are multi platform and often they are very similar to the XBox 360 versions. As the 360 has a tri-core CPU, these games are usually written with that in mind and often this leaks into the PC port.

As for "multi-core", I realise there is no industry standard for what it mean, so we are both right. But my definition is a CPU with 3 or more cores onboard (and not a many-core). I usually don't term 2 core CPUs as multicore as the term "dual-core" is so ubiquitous these days.

When I mentioned GTA4, I meant it as an example of a game that basically requires a quad core to play. Others include ARMAII and Battlefield Bad Company 2. Since the OP did say "etc etc" I don't think its out of order to suggest other games than the ones mentioned in the first post.

I appreciate that you've pointed out two of the games benefit from quadcore processors, but the Core i5 is also substantially faster than the Q6600 - an in-place upgrade isn't the only possibility here.

If we're talking about future games in some cases, why not save up and upgrade the motherboard\memory as well? Granted, the Core 2 Q6600 could be overclocked but there's no guarantee there...

 

[Redmint]

You were referring to members market deals, which aren't as static as store prices, same goes for availability. In retail the cost is sky-high because there are so few left.

Bay prices aren't far off that and there's not much of an availability problem there.

Sticking with the same motherboard is a lot easier, no hassle with reinstalling windows and an i5 upgrade isn't 'needed' in this case. Why would you argue that a dual core is still fine then suggest i5 anyway?

 

[reflux]

Go for it - Q6600 is getting old now but by no means slow. Welll worth it IMO.

 

[cmndr_andi]

You were referring to members market deals, which aren't as static as store prices, same goes for availability. In retail the cost is sky-high because there are so few left.

Yes, I was - as well as other sources. From what I have seen in the last year there is a steady stream of people selling Q6600 chips, so I don't think its unreasonable to assume that you can get one for this price.

As for selling the E6600 for £40, that is a rather good price, I have seen these go for more than this recently.

Indeed, retail is out of the question as these chips have been EOL for donkey's years.

I appreciate that you've pointed out two of the games benefit from quadcore processors, but the Core i5 is also substantially faster than the Q6600 - an in-place upgrade isn't the only possibility here.

If we're talking about future games in some cases, why not save up and upgrade the motherboard\memory as well? Granted, the Core 2 Q6600 could be overclocked but there's no guarantee there...

Indeed, the i5 quad is a wonderful CPU and probably one of the very best bang-for-buck gaming CPUs around today. However, an investment in a £150 CPU, £70+ motherboard and £80+ RAM (total = £300 minimum) is a quite a bit different from paying £80 for a new CPU.

If the OP can afford a £300 upgrade, then great - but for a gaming going to a Q6600, overclocking it a bit and ensuing you have a good GPU is better use of funds IMHO and should play almost everything currently out very well.

 

[Indy500]

Bay prices aren't far off that and there's not much of an availability problem there.

Sticking with the same motherboard is a lot easier, no hassle with reinstalling windows and an i5 upgrade isn't 'needed' in this case. Why would you argue that a dual core is still fine then suggest i5 anyway?

I did say that with a caveat, ie future games that would benefit from quadcore, and I don't know how much the OP has to spend so saving might imply delaying the upgrade for several months.