Is a Quad the right choice?

[Brutus04]

Want to OC a bit over 3GhZ. Some say go with a Q6600...? Tried the E8400 but the thermal sensors were stuck so I RMA'd. Mostly a gamer looking for longevity and a big price drop until I can afford to retool and seriously start looking at i7.

Appreciate your thoughts and expertise...Thanks! :beer:

 

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: Brutus04
Want to OC a bit over 3GhZ. Some say go with a Q6600...? Tried the E8400 but the thermal sensors were stuck so I RMA'd. Mostly a gamer looking for longevity and a big price drop until I can afford to retool and seriously start looking at i7.

Appreciate your thoughts and expertise...Thanks! :beer:

Q6600 is a good choice. Mines does 3.2GHz on stock volts with a cheap heatsink (120 Hours OCCT stable.) I can get it to run at 3.6GHz with a small bump in voltage, but I am unwilling to put the effort into buying better cooling, or even a better motherboard to really get it stable to my standards.

Go for it. i7 is nice, but just a hair expensive for my tastes.

 

[JMapleton]

Buy the cheapest, i7 will be affordable in 9 months.

 

[Big Lar]

Q9400 is a good chip, tho for gaming an E8xxx is probably a better choice if you OC. If you run apps that will make use of a Quad thats a different story.

Larry

 

[Shmee]

The Q9400 would be good upgrade, though for not much more, you may want to get a Q9550. Or you could get an E8500.

Try this, for $13 they guarantee E0. http://www.antaresdigital.com/customer/cart.php

Comes to $275

 

[F1shF4t]

With a q9400 it should be easy to get to 3.2ghz probably even stock voltage.
Even with a 2180 @ 3ghz a stock q6600 feels a lot faster so any quad will be a descent upgrade. I would go with a q9400 over the q6600. Having two 65nm quads I can tell you they put out a lot of heat.

The q9550 will be easier to clock higher, but if your aiming for only around 3ghz just get the cheaper q9400. The cache should not make a big difference cause even the crippled q8200s with half the cache are just as fast as q6600s.

 

[demiurge3141]

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
With a q9400 it should be easy to get to 3.2ghz probably even stock voltage.
Even with a 2180 @ 3ghz a stock q6600 feels a lot faster so any quad will be a descent upgrade. I would go with a q9400 over the q6600. Having two 65nm quads I can tell you they put out a lot of heat.

The q9550 will be easier to clock higher, but if your aiming for only around 3ghz just get the cheaper q9400. The cache should not make a big difference cause even the crippled q8200s with half the cache are just as fast as q6600s.

then again the q6600 doubles as a heater in these cold cold winter months......

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: demiurge3141
then again the q6600 doubles as a heater in these cold cold winter months......

We don't get many of those here in Australia

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: demiurge3141

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
With a q9400 it should be easy to get to 3.2ghz probably even stock voltage.
Even with a 2180 @ 3ghz a stock q6600 feels a lot faster so any quad will be a descent upgrade. I would go with a q9400 over the q6600. Having two 65nm quads I can tell you they put out a lot of heat.

The q9550 will be easier to clock higher, but if your aiming for only around 3ghz just get the cheaper q9400. The cache should not make a big difference cause even the crippled q8200s with half the cache are just as fast as q6600s.

then again the q6600 doubles as a heater in these cold cold winter months......

Could wear out the power supply on his IP35 too. Unless he wants to do some soldering...However, the 9x mult on his q6600 would help him get a nicer OC.

OP: have you tried OC'ing your e2180 further? I found a noticeable difference between 3.0 and 3.4 in XP. In Vista forget it, you'd just plain need something faster.

 

[Brutus04]

All,
Thanks for your replies.

I have tried getting past 3GhZ on my E2180 however, it requires boosting up the E. I'm thinking of getting one of the new GB MB...UD3R. Thanks again!

 

[maluckey]

I'm thinking of getting one of the new GB MB...UD3R. Thanks again!

450 x 7.5 on that board with a Q9400 is set and forget. I'm typing this response on a Q9400 and UD3R at 400 x 8 and RAM ticking at 1066. This thing is an overclockers nightmare. It's so easy a Newb can OC it.

I havent cracked 4.0 gHz....yet, but 460 x 8 I can pass overnight p95 and linpack.

 

[Tweakin]

I tried a q6600 on my IP-35E and it was too much for the board. I had massive vdrop/droop, leaving me at a high vcore for a stable 3Ghz, and it seemed slower then my e6750...just thought I'd add that.

 

[Brutus04]

Thanks Maluckey!
My UD3R just arrived today. I am thinking the 9400 will keep me going for quite awhile.

 

[alkalinetaupehat]

Heh, my Q9450 does 3.2Ghz at 1.13V. Q9550's do OC somewhat better, and the L2 cache (12MB) pwns in games. The highest I've got my proc to was 3.8 and ONCE I booted into Vista at 4.0, but it was stable for about a minute. For just over 3Ghz though, the Q9400 should be good. If you game a lot, the extra L2 cache does make a difference. Have fun with the UD3R too!

 

[maluckey]

I'm typing this on the UD3R at 450 x 8 WHILE running P95 and encoding a DVD. Everything except: VRAM, VCORE and RAM Timing (set to 5-5-5-15, 1180 mHz with latch at 400mHz) is on auto. Zero V-Droop.....ever.

Q9400, HyperX-T1 2 x 4GB, ultra cheap Artic cooling 7 cooler.

Like I said......tooo easy.

edited to correct usual poor typing skills...........

 

[taltamir]

Mostly a gamer looking for longevity

For longevity, the more cores the better.

 

[Markfw]

Why not read the sticky that I created to answer exactly this question.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Why not read the sticky that I created to answer exactly this question.

People actually read those things? :evil: