Digitimes: Q6600 Phase Out

[Quiksilver]

Q6600 Coming to an end.

 

[broosewain]

Sounds like a prime time to get one. I've held onto my last CPU for about 3 years now, so I'm unsure whether I should go for a Q6600 or an E8400. I do game a LOT, but since I'll be holding onto the computer for quite some time most likely, I'm debating if the Q6600 is the CPU of choice for perhaps another 3+ years. I presume the Q6600 will be a more powerful CPU as more and more games/apps take advantage of all 4 cores.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: broosewain
Sounds like a prime time to get one. I've held onto my last CPU for about 3 years now, so I'm unsure whether I should go for a Q6600 or an E8400. I do game a LOT, but since I'll be holding onto the computer for quite some time most likely, I'm debating if the Q6600 is the CPU of choice for perhaps another 3+ years. I presume the Q6600 will be a more powerful CPU as more and more games/apps take advantage of all 4 cores.

This is my thought as well, however the e8400 performs better right NOW in basically all games, simply due to higher clock speed. That said, I'm going to go for a quad myself, because I don't need a higher clock speed currently for my games, however I might have more use for 2 extra cores in the future.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Don't forget the power and heat benefits of the E8400. The Q6600 is a great processor to have, but I'd suggest looking at a dual core unless you're not planning on upgrading for a long time (2+ years), or can actually benefit from more than two cores.

The jump from single core to dual core was much more noticeable than from dual to quad.

 

[nyker96]

great I hope that switch over to 45nm quads and lower the prices accordingly to fill out the Q6600 slot.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Nooooooooooooooo! I :heart: Q6600.

 

[JMapleton]

Does anyone know which proc will fill the gap of this one? Some unknown/unreleased 45nm?

 

[Elstumpo]

I thought the Q9450 would be the gap filler, or the Q8200 as it is in the same price range.

 

[magreen]

If the c2d was any guide, they usually "phase out" an older cpu by releasing newer cpus at a lower price. E.g. the 333 fsb c2ds made all the 266fsb ones obsolete not by performing better, but by being cheaper. Same thing with e6320 and e6420 -- they just made them the same price or lower than the lower-cache e6300 and e6400, so nobody would buy the older chips anymore. And the e4300/4400/4500 gave pretty much all the performance of the e6300/6400 at a lower price, too.

So "phasing out" the q6600 could be good for all of us -- 45nm quads of equal or better performance at a similar or lower price.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: magreen
So "phasing out" the q6600 could be good for all of us -- 45nm quads of equal or better performance at a similar or lower price.

It is pretty clear what the 65nm Q6600 was developed and released to accomplish. (pigeon-hole the flagship Phenom pricing structure to the sub-$250 bracket)

Now with 45nm Phenom II coming out in Q1 the mission of 65nm Q6600 is complete.

A 45nm Q9500 or some such will be rolled out to occupy the ~$200 price bracket in Q1 to coincide with AMD's 45nm Phenom II release.

The performance of the flagship Phenom II 940 part will determine the clockspeed and cache size of the Q6600 replacement as it will naturally be positioned to compete directly with the 3GHz Phenom II but priced to intentionally pigeon-hole Phenom II 940 to the $200 level.

If you were Intel would you play Q1 any differently?

 

[magreen]

Makes perfect sense. Sounds good for us consumers, at least in the short term.

 

[bryanW1995]

I don't buy that, especially in light of intel's gross margin expectations. Q6600 has been intel's volume quad core cpu for 2 years now. They went from $850 to $500 down to $250 over time, and have recently slowly dribbled msrp down closer to $200. However, they went down to the $250 range several months before barcelona came out. basically since c2d came out in 06, intel has been competing with themselves on price point. The i7 920 will keep phenom 45nm under $300 already, I see no benefit to intel in deliberately cannibalizing their own profits by throwing out a Q9500 for ~ $200 or whatever. I WISH that AMD were serious competition because we would all benefit from that, but I just don't see that reflected in the market at this time.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
I don't buy that, especially in light of intel's gross margin expectations. Q6600 has been intel's volume quad core cpu for 2 years now. They went from $850 to $500 down to $250 over time, and have recently slowly dribbled msrp down closer to $200. However, they went down to the $250 range several months before barcelona came out. basically since c2d came out in 06, intel has been competing with themselves on price point. The i7 920 will keep phenom 45nm under $300 already, I see no benefit to intel in deliberately cannibalizing their own profits by throwing out a Q9500 for ~ $200 or whatever. I WISH that AMD were serious competition because we would all benefit from that, but I just don't see that reflected in the market at this time.

Problem of i7 holding phenom II prices is that an i7 platform will be quite more expensive than a phenom II, regardless of processor price, independent if you are building from scratch or upgrading from a previous am2+ board.

If phenom II can easily overclock to 4GHz, basically being an E8xxx with4 cores, amd might have a window of time. If it can't it will be a harder fight between E8xxx Q9xxx and PII 920-940. Will have too wait and see

 

[ghost recon88]

About time they phased it out. The Q6600s time has come and gone, 65nm technology and a January 7th 2007 release date. Almost 2 years old...

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: JMapleton
Does anyone know which proc will fill the gap of this one? Some unknown/unreleased 45nm?

They already have the Q8200 to take it's place. It's already priced the same. Performance is close enough for Intel to call them even.

 

[BlueBlazer]

Originally posted by: Concillian

Originally posted by: JMapleton
Does anyone know which proc will fill the gap of this one? Some unknown/unreleased 45nm?

They already have the Q8200 to take it's place. It's already priced the same. Performance is close enough for Intel to call them even.

The Q8200 is still slower than the Q6600. Even if is faster per clock, the lower clock and smaller cache simply holds it back.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: BlueBlazer

Originally posted by: Concillian

Originally posted by: JMapleton
Does anyone know which proc will fill the gap of this one? Some unknown/unreleased 45nm?

They already have the Q8200 to take it's place. It's already priced the same. Performance is close enough for Intel to call them even.

The Q8200 is still slower than the Q6600. Even if is faster per clock, the lower clock and smaller cache simply holds it back.

Folks shouldn't be looking to Q6600 performance to find a 45nm replacement chip. Q6600 was designed/rolled out to cap the price of Phenom and so was designed to perform better than the top-end Phenom.

If you want to know what will replace Q6600 (in terms of the strategy of capping the upper limit to PII pricing structure) you need to determine what Intel believes the performance of PII 940 is will be.

That's not to say it will be cheap like a Q6600, there will be cheaper quads. There will be cheaper quads, but they aren't intended to replace Q6600 in the role that Q6600 was designed to accomplish.

 

[Griswold]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Q6600 was designed/rolled out to cap the price of Phenom and so was designed to perform better than the top-end Phenom.

I'd like the crystal ball Intel must have to know what the top end phenom would perform like in order to design a product almost a year prior to the product it should compete with.

If anything, they were guessing at best. But in reality, I think, the Q6600 was just a great feat Intel pulled off without any particular thoughts about Phenom at that time (again, a good year before Phenom hit the shelves).