Which processor to get?

[Computer_Freak]

Ok as the title says, which processor to get?

I will be gaming a lot, but other than that, just the usual, music, vids, net etc...

I read the CPU 101 and it sais:

Cache
Cache is essentially, a chunk of very high speed memory available exclusively to the processor for storing very commonly accessed data. When the CPU is looking for an instruction/data and it is found in the cache, that is known as a cache hit. There are several types of cache:

* L1 Data and L1 Trace (collectively known as L1), this type of cache is usually quite small (small on AMD processors and tiny on Intel) and is the first place the CPU looks for information. Due to its small size and the variance of instructions/data available, cache hits in L1 are not a performance bottleneck
* L2 cache is the most marketed cache and is big enough to actually influence the performance of the processor with budget processors cheaping out on the amount of L2 cache available. Although "the more L2 cache available, the better", also note that the more cache they cram onto a processor, the slower and less efficient it becomes and the more the cache becomes dependent on optimizations designed to improve cache hits
* L3 cache is essentially, another type of L2 (but slower still) and is reserved for storing a (relative) whack of data somewhat close to the CPU. L3 cache was available only on select models of the Intel Pentium4 Extreme Edition and has since been discontinued in favor of a larger L2 cache.

so therefore the more L2 cache, the more calculations can be stored, but the slower the processor (also how optimized has cache become?)...

So what to get out of these...

Q9450 - 1333FSB, 12Mb L2, 2,66Ghz
Q9300 - 1333FSB, 6Mb L2, 2.5Ghz
Q6600 - 1066FSB, 8Mb L2, 2.4Ghz (how dou you see on the box if its GO stepping?)
E8400 - 1333FSB, 6Mb L2, 3.0Ghz

I can oc the FSB right (thats by increasing the bus speed, the FSB will be the same, just at higher clocks?)

So if thats true about the L2 cache, then technically the Q9300 is the best (and i can oc it to 2.66Ghz or more...) as it has the least L2, and high FSB

But with the Q6600, i wont need a new mobo....

So what to get...

 

[hermeslyre]

so therefore the more L2 cache, the more calculations can be stored, 1.but the slower the processor (also how optimized has cache become?)...

1. but the slower the cache. The processor itself is nominally effected, it obviously has a harder time of things though as the cache = a type of heart blood.

Tbh, I don't think even the 12mb of cache would readily show the symptoms described in that sticky, it may be more in reference to large amounts of cache, I.E 64mb+. Even if not so, I doubt the q9450 is less a processor because it has lots of L2 cache, more the other way around. Although I believe it to be the best of the chips listed, your predicament is normal if not annoying. I would personally forego the Mobo upgrade and just get the Q6600.

(how dou you see on the box if its GO stepping?)

You can't tell online unless you call and ask. If you're looking in the store the box will list the s-step (stepping) somewhere on it, I know that SLACR is a stepping that belongs to G0, but of others I am unlearned.

I google imaged it. You can see SLACR clearly at the end of the PROD CODE.

 

[Computer_Freak]

yes cool thanks

so how much of a performance difference will there be between a Q9450, and a Q6600....

is there anybenchmarks between the 2?

 

[maroon1]

so how much of a performance difference will there be between a Q9450, and a Q6600....

Anandtech did a comparison between Q9300 and Q6600

Q9300 performed better by 7.4% on average and it consume less power than Q6600 at idle and full load

Source

If Q9300 is 7.4% faster than Q6600, then I think Q9450 would be around 15% faster than Q6600

 

[Computer_Freak]

What about say the Q6700?

How much faster is that than the Q6600.

Cause i hear there will be a major price drop, and if thats true, it will hit us in a month after April 20th.

Here the Q6700 costs $713
And the Q6600 costs $344

Thats damn expensive compared to you guys in the USA

So itll be nice to have a price drop.....

So yeah what will the Q6700 performance be vs Q9300 vs Q9450

 

[Computer_Freak]

remember the Q6600 is 2.4Ghz and the Q9300 is 2.5Ghz (i know its a little but it is a diff.)

Just remember i got a 1066FSB mobo. To get the new quad, ill have to change mobo.

Is it worth paying an extra $200+ (prices here are ridiculous) for a mobo for a 7% improvement.c(Q6600 vs Q9300)

Same applies for this (Q6700 vs Q9450)

Now the new quad has more cache, better for games, but makes the CPU slower, better temps, but need new mobo

Guys im in a pickle, what would you do....?

Edit: guys i just looked at Biostars site and it says my mobo does not support the quads. I guess ill have to get a new mobo. so Q9450 for me

sorry for the hassles

 

[JasonZBell]

I was asking this same question not too long ago. Ended up going with the E8400 and haven't looked back since. Do a search on this CPU and you'll see what I mean.