• 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.

Q6600 vs E8500

newbe5

newbe5

newbe5

Associate
Joined
14 Oct 2008
Posts
109
Pretty much what the topic says. I realise there must be a ton of posts floating around like this, but I couldn't find a definitive answer anywhere.

I'm building the new rig to play games at 1920x1200, I like the idea of having a quad core, but I will happily get the dual if recommended since the native clock speed is much higher and most games will only use a maximum of 2 cores anyway.

I'm planning on overclocking the Q6600 if I get it, aiming for 3.2GHz, which means I wouldn't have an issue overclocking the E8500 instead (presumably achieving much faster speeds).

Any thoughts much appreciated.

newbe5
 
I can still thank you for your opinion, but I'd been talking in another post and with all the variables considered I decided it was better to go with the Q6600. I thought it would be rude to leave you hanging so I thought it would be best to reply to let you know what I had done and that I wasn't ignoring you :p

I realise that ATM I would get more power out of the dual core, but for lastability, and because of the fact that the GFX card I'm getting has been proven to run better with a quad core chip, I've gone with the 6600 :)
 
You would be very happy with either to be honest!

Its not like a quad core can't play games anyway...
 
newbe5 said:
Pretty much what the topic says. I realise there must be a ton of posts floating around like this, but I couldn't find a definitive answer anywhere.
Click to expand...

There's a search function on the forum, you just need to read the results. There's obviously no such thing as a definitive answer as all you will get are opinions on a forum. This gthjread is no different to the gazillion others asking the same thing. :)
 
If you're overclocking the E8500 is a no-brainer. Quad core support in games is a myth, whispered on the breeze. You will actually get more longevity out of the dual core @ 4GHz.
 
Orangey said:
If you're overclocking the E8500 is a no-brainer. Quad core support in games is a myth, whispered on the breeze. You will actually get more longevity out of the dual core @ 4GHz.
Click to expand...

Doesn't make the extra two cores redundant though?
 
Tests have shown that the 4870x2 runs much better on a quad core chip than on an dual because of the overhead required to run the card, that was pretty much what swayed me. I'm also going to be doing a fair bit of video encoding on my computer, so a quad wouldn't be wasted in that respect, and some new games are starting to be properly threaded, so a quad wouldn't be useless at all.
 
I would never recommend an old-school Q6600 because its dated and uses too much electricty!

I would never recommend an 4870x2 because again its uses way way waaaaaay to much electricty and really is a card only for the Pro-Gamer, Pro-Bencher and general ePeener!

A Q6600 and a 4870x2 is just an electricity guzzling waste of space, prepare for frightning electricty bill price increases! especially if you overclock the 65nm tech quad!

newbe5 you been taking advice from a bunch of nOOb ePeeners! :p
 
I got a Q6600 and its sweet for games. The processor dont make that much difference in the end anyway its the GFX card that boosts performance. So get a Q6600 for windows application speed quality and future apps and use the rest of the cash on an ATI 4870 then crysis will run very happily on full blast.
 
Not overly fussed about Crysis, but I'm still gonna fire it up at least once for the shinyness :P Thanks for all the info all, but I've definitely settled on the Q6600 (the low power edition, thankyou) for the new rig, looking forward to firing it up! :)
 
I'm using a Q6600 at 3.6, and compared to my friends clocked E8400, there wasnt really anything between them.
 
Hi newbe5, at the sort of resolution that you will be gamming at, you will be more GPU limited (Which you are most of the time anyway, which ever sort of resolution you game at) than CPU limited. I would much rather have a Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 running at 3.4 - 3.6GHz than a Dual Core Wolfdale processor running at 4GHz because their will probably be very little difference in terms of performance in games.

Have a look at the graphs below which really show the difference between a Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and the Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale, in terms of game performance is actually very small. :)

Crysis.jpg


WorldInConflict.jpg


Source - Intel Core 2 Duo E8500, E8400 and E8200
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom