Processor Arms Race

H

Hoganflagle

New Member
I am trying to determine which processor to go with on a near future buy. X6800, E6700, or E6600; budget not being a factor. I will not be overclocking, as I have bad PC karma. Currently owning a P4 1.8 gig processor and having seen several games pass me by with 2 gig minimum requirements I know that .2 gig can mean the difference. For some reason I see E6600 being a popular choice for high end rigs, but assume the majority were chosen due to price and overclock intentions.

Also, anyone here have any encounters with Velocity Micro?
 
If you have no budget, then there is no reason not to get the X6800.

There are no games with 2GB required. Recommended, maybe, but not required. I think there are only one or two games that require 1GB.

I have never bought from Velocity Micro....but I can't say that I'd recommend them.
 
I wuold recommend getting 2 gigs of RAM. With no budget, you'll end up getting a X6800, and 2GB of memory will allow you to multitask like a crazy person.
 
You're not going to overclock? then i strongly disagree with getting a X6800... It is Intell's flagship atm.. and its much more expensive because it has unlocked multipliers.. (wich is Imo,.. just for overclocking it)
unlimited budget is nice... but its a shame putting money to waste because of not using THE feat you actually buy that kind of processor for.

I'd suggest a e6700 or e6600.. ( E6600,.. since its the best price performance ratio of the 2.. but with unlimited budget.. get the E6700)
 
Thanks

Bobo; I was talking Processor requirements, not RAM. Company of Heroes, Ghost Recon AW, and Oblivion are a few games that have minimum requirements of a 2 Ghz Processor; my current rig falls short of that.

Archangel; Thanks. Very helpful and logical advice, exactly what I was looking for.
 
Ya I would agree with archangel but if you do want the upmost performance get the x6800 but the e6600 seems to be the sweet spot, most power for the buck. However if this is going to a future purchase the first kentsfields are supposed to be released late november I believe I saw, thats only gonna be the higher end models with the rest of the line released early first quarter of next year.
 
Hoganflagle said:
Bobo; I was talking Processor requirements, not RAM. Company of Heroes, Ghost Recon AW, and Oblivion are a few games that have minimum requirements of a 2 Ghz Processor; my current rig falls short of that.
Click to expand...
Well that also is wrong. Any C2D (which are in the 1GHz range) will kick the crap out of a P4 3.8GHz.

bball4life said:
Ya I would agree with archangel but if you do want the upmost performance get the x6800 but the e6600 seems to be the sweet spot, most power for the buck. However if this is going to a future purchase the first kentsfields are supposed to be released late november I believe I saw, thats only gonna be the higher end models with the rest of the line released early first quarter of next year.
Click to expand...

Like I said before, with no budget, you should get the X6800. The 6600 and 6700 are certainly good processors, and better for their price, but the X6800 still outperforms them in pretty much everything.
 
I see said the blind man

Bobo;

The minimum 2 Ghz requirement pertains to non-C2D series systems. I suppose they based their minimum requirements at the time with the perception that a majority of users had not acquired the C2D's yet or C2D owners would figure that their rigs would exceed the requirement by math applied.

Thanks for your advice also.
 
As Archangel said, I as well would go with the E6600 or E6700 (which are more then half the price of the X6800). The X6800 is meant for overclockers, because of their unlucked multipliers, it's Intel's version of the FX series. Even if money isnt a problem, theres no real reason to get the X6800 for more then twice as much money when the performance gain wont be that much more.
 
Hoganflagle said:
Bobo;

The minimum 2 Ghz requirement pertains to non-C2D series systems. I suppose they based their minimum requirements at the time with the perception that a majority of users had not acquired the C2D's yet or C2D owners would figure that their rigs would exceed the requirement by math applied.

Thanks for your advice also.
Click to expand...

Correction, the minimum 2Ghz requirement is for single core processors. Really, anything halfway up to date can do it to an extent. C'mon..1.8Ghz was so 4 years ago. :)I don't even want to know how old my Prescott is at its 3.2Ghz rating.
 
Bobo said:
Core 2 Duos run at 1.8GHz. (some of them) Clock speeds are going down, not up.
Click to expand...

Hah, you don't say. I guess I haven't noticed that at all.

When I stated that 1.8Ghz was "so 4 years ago" (which, let me hint to you, was a playful joke), please take note that I was taking note of single core processors, and anything "halfway up to date". Pretty sure that the Core 2 Duo is today, not "half way up to date".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top