• 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.

QX6850 - why??

Kirth Gersen said:
For those of you that have a Q68**, do you run any applications which make use of the 4 horses or is this a "because I can" kind of thing?

ps - No criticism whatsoever implied - just interested. Until recently I had a hobby which makes me blush at unjustifiable amounts of money I was spending...
Click to expand...

I built up my QX6850 System for running 3d Studio Max on and its vastly improved rendering times, some renders can still take hours though.

Have to say though all games run fantastic , I run all at 2560x1600 on a 30inch dell LCD. Its expensive going for the best but considering I spend a lot of time in front of my computers it well worth it.
 
johny dolan said:
My qx6800 cost me £787 from overclockers a few moths back.I wanted the best and could afford it so why not.All comes down to money i guess i think if you laid down the top parts on a table and said take your pick guys everyone would take a qx6850 and 8800 ultra i doubt many would opt for a q6600 if the parts were all free.If you want the best performance and can afford it the top qx are the better cpu.Look at the 3dmark world records you wont find any q6600s in there at the top.Q6600 is great CPU for the money but its not the best if you have deeper pockets.Im sure some guys here will flame me and say Ive got more money than sense but end of the day its my money and i could afford it.Premium parts always demand premium prices.
Click to expand...

What are you running your QX6850 at by the way?

And what size screen do you game at?

Anyway the QX6850 is a waste of money unless your a real hardcore overclocker and benchmarking is your life.
 
I agree with johny dolan. A QX6850 is so expensive because its factory guaranteed to run four cores at 3GHz. You're paying for the extra quality core yield and a chip that is 3Ghz stock, 3.75Ghz overclocked. A Q6600 only has to run at 2.4, so it's obviously not as good a chip. Whether its worth the money or not is up to the person paying for the damn thing.

Plus you get a 1333FSB which works wonders with DDR3.
 
Last edited:
Ok guys, thanks for your imput. I know obviously you need to pay an arm and a leg for the latest stuff, but, to me personally the extra few hundred ghz isnt worth the extra £400.

Especially when i seen this in cupras sig : Intel C2Q Q6600 @ 3.8Ghz

But fair play to you who do buy one, im not knocking you at all - but me being 17 would have to go for the cheaper version. But in reality, apart from say 100-300mhz after max overclock, there not that different and to me definitly wouldnt warrant the extra 400 quid.

But how about this - why would intel make the newer versions of the q6600 run (after overclocks) just under their top range chip (also overclocked - unless im getting this grossly wrong , can the qx6850 oc to something like 4.5ghz?) which is roughly tripple the price? Doesnt make sense to me really...as even hardcore computer enthusiasts who would normally buy the top range stuff may consider getting the q6600 over the qx6850
 
stickrod said:
What are you running your QX6850 at by the way?

And what size screen do you game at?

Anyway the QX6850 is a waste of money unless your a real hardcore overclocker and benchmarking is your life.
Click to expand...
Its only a waste of money if you cant afford it.Imagine 3 guys first one has £3 in the bank and would have to use credit to buy the CPU then guy 2 has £3000 in the bank and can buy it easy cash and still have £2400 left and lastly guy 3 who has £30000+ in the bank and can buy with just the interest he makes.See my point now everyone here has different ages and incomes and to someones that thinks a certain price is too high the first guy it is but for guy 3 its just beer money.Some guys on here think all those q6600s will do 3.8 gig well that's just bs some guys cant get 3 gig plenty of older mobos cant go over 300 fsb remember.Stickroad my CPU is the qx6800 and ATM is running stock but for benches i can run 3.8 and i did post my orb that shows it at that with a score of over 18000.Another in this thread asked what uses the 4 cores well some of the games im playing do.Games like supcom,fsx,lost planet get a boost from multi core and dont forget the game most are waiting for crisis is multi threaded.As i said before there top of the range parts are at a premium price and its down to the buyer to decide if its worth it or not because the higher you go the law of diminishing returns kicks in hard and you pay vast amounts of money for ever smaller gains.Then if you bite the bullet and buy the best there will always be someone to attack you for doing so.But in all honesty they are just jelluse really and wish they had the same parts.If you have the money and want the qx6850 and sli ultras buy them and enjoy if you dont have the cash or are unwilling to spend then dont
 
Last edited:
The other reason for buying is that not everyone can be bothered to tinker with overclocking. Theres a lot of people out there with the disposable income who just want to buy a fast machine that works, they don't care about BIOS settins etc You only have to look at Dell and HP buying up companies that make top end pc's for a premium price. Theres a big market out there.

They can take it out of the box, connect it up and its fast, they don'thave to spend time checking does this memory work with this motherboard properly or which coloured memory slots do I use on the motherboard for it to be stable.
 
I nerve thought I'd have a quad core this side of next year at the earliest but at £31 for a good mobo + good ddr2800 ram and the Q6600 it was a price I just could not pass up and I am extremely chuffed with it because not only has the upgrade hassle been eliminated when games like crysis etc are out but also I'm all set for at least a year or 2 on the cpu front!
 
For £780 you (apparently) get the fastest stock cpu you can buy. It's a money no object thing.

Obviously, being a forum predominately populated by overclockers, most comments are going to be along the lines of "what a waste of money" and I know that most people here (including myself) would spend £780 on our pc's differently and probably get the same (or better) performance with a some effort. why?

a) because we can save lots of money and
b) because we enjoy it.

However, if saving a few hundred quid isn't your main concern and you have no interest in (or time to) overclock and yet you want the fastest cpu around, this is the one to go for.

Personally i am 80% into overclocking to save money and 20% for the fun. As I get older , time becomes too precious for spending evenings trying to extract the best out of a chip. If I had oodles of cash lying about, I would just buy an "ultimate" rig from here and be done with it.

As it is, I bought a £56 2160 (2.8 so far) and a 1950pro.
 
If you can afford it, why not buy one. An Extreme branded CPU is no different to any other luxury product. Anyone ridiculing someone for buying one is simply jealous IMO.
 
The majority of their sales would be to business I think. If its tax deductable and you make such a good living that you cannot tolerate anything that holds you back then why not.

I think all their highest priced and best options are immediately made available to businesses for that reason. Especially if its going to be used 24 hours a day and offset against the workload of more then one person.
Technology would move slower if such demands did not allready exist
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom