Q6600 or E6700

Sparky · 22 Jun 2007 at 00:57

d34d_m34t said:
By my tone i hope you mean my unwaveringly congenial and cooperative attitude

No i meant its nice to know that when you have written something everyone has to agree or be told they are to thick to understand.

easyrider · 22 Jun 2007 at 01:22

d34d_m34t said:
That's exactly the same thing people said about dual cores when they first came out, that for just general use/gaming they were overkill. But now look at game boxes, eg the new DiRT game, it says 'recommended system spec intel core 2 Duo'. the exact same thing will happen with quad cores in the future. If you think it wont then you're just kidding yourself.

Please stop being a moron

d34d_m34t · 22 Jun 2007 at 01:31

I truly can't believe I am the only one who thinks that future releases will benefit from having more cores available to use...but if I am, then i will concede that I am a moron. :rolleyes:

bobby don't listen to me about getting the quad core, just get a dual, it will last you forever apparently.

ergonomics · 22 Jun 2007 at 01:34

d34d_m34t said:
I truly can't believe I am the only one who thinks that future releases will benefit from having more cores available to use...but if I am, then i will concede that I am a moron.

are you ignoring my post? i was trying to subtly hint that yes things will benefit in the future by having 4 cores +. dont worry your not the only one, and im sure the many people who own Qseries would say its a future proof as well.

easyrider · 22 Jun 2007 at 01:42

d34d_m34t said:
I truly can't believe I am the only one who thinks that future releases will benefit from having more cores available to use...but if I am, then i will concede that I am a moron. bobby don't listen to me about getting the quad core, just get a dual, it will last you forever apparently.

Your analysis is ok.

Its just how you come across.

d34d_m34t · 22 Jun 2007 at 01:43

ergonomics said:
are you ignoring my post? i was trying to subtly hint that yes things will benefit in the future by having 4 cores +. dont worry your not the only one, and im sure the many people who own Qseries would say its a future proof as well.

lol my apologies i wasn't ignoring you, i was just being hyperbolic

Paul11 · 22 Jun 2007 at 08:08

this argument will continue long in to the future..

next it will be

"why do we need 8 cores" then "why do we need 16 cores"

jump way forward to the future this threat could be....

shall i get 64 cores or just stick with 32 ?

adapt · 22 Jun 2007 at 11:53

Just to put my 2 pence in this convo. In my experiance there is no point planning too far ahead when buying a new cpu etc. Buying something to future proof yourself doesnt work as there will always be something else. Buy for now and what you need.

shadowrunner · 22 Jun 2007 at 12:07

I'd get quad core after the price cuts if you can afford it, but only if you intend to make the system last, if you are the type of person that upgrades once a year, then stick with dualcore.

pastymuncher · 22 Jun 2007 at 16:12

If it's just for gaming then the E6750 is the same price or cheaper than the 6600. There are a couple of retailers that have them. The 3ghz E6850 is out for £182 as well.

bobby_valentino · 22 Jun 2007 at 22:38

...Hmm decisions, decisions...

easyrider · 22 Jun 2007 at 22:47

Just wait unil the 22 July and get a Q6600 its a no brainer

ergonomics · 22 Jun 2007 at 23:35

easyrider said:
Just wait unil the 22 July and get a Q6600 its a no brainer

sense

bobby_valentino · 22 Jun 2007 at 23:45

Also another one of the main reasons the Q6600 is reducing in price is because of a new quad cpu soon to be released: Core 2 Quad Q6700 @ 2.66 GHz...i bet you all knew that lol...

Participant · 23 Jun 2007 at 09:09

CS||nuTs said:
And how many games currently require dual core?How long has dual core been available? Who is trying to kid themselves?

Please be quiet. There are already games that make use of quad core. Supcom is barely playable on a large battle without one, so his comments about future-proofing are correct. And in answer to this question many new games coming out practically require a dual core to be playable, so it's only a short matter of time before games have quad cores listed as the recommended specs.

OP - go with easy's no-brainer suggestion of waiting for the Q6600 price to drop in July. 4 cores beats 2 even at a slightly lower clock speed and contrarary to what CS nuTs [wonder why they call him that!] believes.

shaffaaf27 · 23 Jun 2007 at 11:59

Well how about we think what he/she needs the cpu for first?

If B_V doesnt need it for gaming in the xtreme, then a Q core wont be neccessary, and if B_V isnt doing any encoding, then once again it wont be needed.

In the end, if you can hold out just 1 month, and decide what you need to use it for, then, itll be easier to decide.

EDC · 23 Jun 2007 at 14:49

Try ripping a DVD movie using Auto-GK, while your compressing an AVI file using WinRAR, then maybe do a little gaming all at the same time & you'll quickly see the benefits of a Quad core over Dual Core.

easyrider · 23 Jun 2007 at 15:42

When the drops happen there will be no reason not have a Q6600 in your rig.

Afterall people are paying 150+ now for dualcores so paying 180 for a quad is no biggy.

Ross1234 · 23 Jun 2007 at 15:47

how many sockets do you need for a quad core?

Cob · 23 Jun 2007 at 16:01