Q6600 or E8400

ZeroWing

ZeroWing

New Member
Which one would you guys choose? They are almost same in price except the Q6600 is $20 more. I was wondering which one would run games better, are there even games that utilize 4 cores? By the time they release the Q6600 will probably be outdated am I right?
 
Last edited:
T

TrainTrackHack

VIP Member
Bioshock already utilizes at least 8 threads, I'm almost certain it's not the only game that utilizes more than 2 cores out there though they are scarce. Since games are more GPU than CPU bound, the E8400 won't offer any massive frame advantages if you just OC your Q6600 to 3GHz (even a noob can do that, they're just that good OCers), for only $20 more I'd definitely go Quad.
 
ScOuT

ScOuT

VIP Member
$20 extra = future proof

There is no reason not to get the quad, just like what hackapelite kinda said, they can hit 3GHz without a problem. You never know what a year can do for the software industry....all games could use all 4 cores this time next year:)
 
Ramodkk

Ramodkk

VIP Member
^ It's not like ALL games are gonna use 4 cores within a year.

I guess I'm the "different" guy. I'd say you get the E8400 since it can overclock better/further. I don't know how many times I'll have to say this but anyways:

If you are going to be playing games mainly, get a Wolfdale because you can overclock the heck our of them and they would give you better FPS in games. If you are going to use Photoshop, video editing or video/animation rendering or you're just one of those people who like to have 5 applications open while they are burning a disc and playing a game, then it'd be a good idea to get a Quad.

Quad cores are not yet the standard for processors. By the time they are, by the time all/most games use 4 cores and most apps use all 4 cores, there are gonna be cheaper/better quad processors.

But I know, that's only my opinion... :rolleyes:
 
scooter

scooter

banned
e8400...for sure.

q6600 is an ok cpu but its a 'budget quad'...

Get the dual core 8400 and u can always consider a real quad in a year or whatever.

Sorry to those running a q6600 but it is bottom of barrel, lets be honest.
 
scooter

scooter

banned
Roncharlespatton said:
Actully scooter you are kinda right, obviously the quads are better the more money they cost.

I dream about you:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115051
Click to expand...

Well, to an extent..

Just because one cpu is more money than another doesnt always make it better but there are multiple reasons why I know the e8400 is better than the Q6600.

For the purposes of this thread and the choice between the 2 cpus---there isnt even a second I would think of choosing the quad.
 
Ramodkk

Ramodkk

VIP Member
scooter said:
e8400...for sure.

q6600 is an ok cpu but its a 'budget quad'...

Get the dual core 8400 and u can always consider a real quad in a year or whatever.

Sorry to those running a q6600 but it is bottom of barrel, lets be honest.
Click to expand...

Thank you! Finally someone understands... :p
 
Droogie

Droogie

New Member
Well, I got the Q6700 but If I to pick over I probably would have gotten the E8400. There both great CPU's and you probably won't notice that big of a difference between the two. Sure the Q6600 is a lower end quad-core, but that certainly doesn't make it a bad CPU.
 
Last edited:
D

DirtyD86

banned
my view on the situation is that buying an E8400 is sort of like buying a really nice analog TV set. if you want performance in games only, then buy it. but a year from now whenever it is needing to be replaced you will regret it.

if you are a multitasker and are looking more towards the future you will do the smart thing and buy a quad. the Q6600 may be the budget intel quad but it can easily be overclocked to 3.0.... even if software and games currently only use two of the four cores, 3ghz is no slouch, it can handle anything out currently at maximum settings or close to it. saying a Q6600 is a cheap CPU because it is one of intels lower costing quads is sort of like saying an E class mercedes is a cheap car.

in a nutshell, 4 > 2.
 
scooter

scooter

banned
DirtyD86 said:
my view on the situation is that buying an E8400 is sort of like buying a really nice analog TV set. if you want performance in games only, then buy it. but a year from now whenever it is needing to be replaced you will regret it.

if you are a multitasker and are looking more towards the future you will do the smart thing and buy a quad. the Q6600 may be the budget intel quad but it can easily be overclocked to 3.0.... even if software and games currently only use two of the four cores, 3ghz is no slouch, it can handle anything out currently at maximum settings or close to it. saying a Q6600 is a cheap CPU because it is one of intels lower costing quads is sort of like saying an E class mercedes is a cheap car.

in a nutshell, 4 > 2.
Click to expand...

Performance in games only?!?! Obviously you havent used an e8400...so thats just a silly comment.

And comparing a bottom-end quad cpu to a higher-end mercedes is also silly..

I would have said the q6600 is like the C-class..
 
Interested

Interested

New Member
hell no. a q6600 is a clk 55, but now they have the clk 63 (q9450). a c-class would be a e2160. and a e8400 would be a clk 550 or such :p. mercedes is a bad example, how about this:

BMW 335i = e8400 (335i has twin turbo 3 liter inline 6, newer, and faster in a straight line and on a track, and cheaper, and lighter, so it handles better, like a cheap sports car.)
BMW 650i = Q6600 (650i is an older model, has a V8 making more power, but its heavier, slower, but more luxorious than the 335i and also more expensive, and still has a naturally aspirated V8.)

so u choose, a cheaper, quicker sports coupe, with a twin-turbo I-6 or a more expensive slower yet more prestige grand tourer with a V8.

lol. :D

idk about u guys, but i dont consider a e-class high end, not even a clk. :confused:
 
Last edited:
scooter

scooter

banned
Interested said:
hell no. a q6600 is a clk 55, but now they have the clk 63 (q9450). a c-class would be a e2160. and a e8400 would be a clk 550 or such :p. mercedes is a bad example, how about this:

BMW 335i = e8400 (335i has twin turbo 3 liter inline 6, newer, and faster in a straight line and on a track, and cheaper, and lighter, so it handles better, like a cheap sports car.)
BMW 650i = Q6600 (650i is an older model, has a V8 making more power, but its heavier, slower, but more luxorious than the 335i and also more expensive, and still has a naturally aspirated V8.)

so u choose, a cheaper, quicker sports coupe, with a twin-turbo I-6 or a more expensive slower yet more prestige grand tourer with a V8.

lol. :D
Click to expand...


Where is KRS-ONE! you just dropped some serious science!

LOL..

we are both making horrible comparisons but I love cars so I find it highly amusing!

God I hate BMW's though..
 
Jerrick

Jerrick

New Member
I went Q6600.

4 cores running at 3ghz each doesnt sound bad to me at all, specially when the stock quad-core is $1,000+ and clocked at 3.2ghz. Im sure that one stock is going to perform better than a Q6600 OCed to 3.2ghz, but still.

Im not much of a gamer, but for me, 1, 2, 3, or 4 cores getting used at 3ghz each is going to be good for me now, and good for me for quite a few years. And I know that is going to perform very well with all the recording I do, with multiple VSTs open and running, recording/multi-track.

For me, the quad is just more efficient right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top