Is Q6600@3.0 = i5 2500K@3.3

[Tk1]

A clock to clock comparison, is the two CPUs the same performance-wise?

 

[CFP]

The 2500K will outperform a Q6600 clock for clock by a fairly large margin.

 

[Brunnis]

No, not even close. The 2500K is significantly faster per clock. Here's a comparison between the 2500K and the Core 2 Quad Q9650. The Q9650 is probably ~5% faster than a Q6600@3GHz, but it gives you a pretty good idea of the differences.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/49?vs=288

 

[Rifter]

are you serious?

 

[RussianSensation]

Q6600 @ 2.4ghz = 48.7
2500k @ 2.8ghz = 79.4
Adjusting 2500k to 2.4ghz = 68.1
Source

Therefore, clock-for-clock a 2500k is 40% faster than a Q6600. This makes sense. Penryn was 5% faster than C2Q, Core i7 (1st) gen was 15-20% faster than Penryn, and SB is 15% faster than Core i7 (1st) gen = 1.05*1.175 (mid-point)*1.15 = 1.42x.

2500k @ 3.3ghz would then be 54% faster than a Q6600 @ 3.0ghz. Of course 2500k also has TurboBoost at stock speeds.

 

[Idontcare]

Is Q6600@3.0 = i5 2500K@3.3

No

A clock to clock comparison, is the two CPUs the same performance-wise?

No

 

[jvroig]

If this thread/topic seems strange for some members, this was merely brought on by our new member (the OP) misinterpreting a comment in this thread. (Post #19)

The OP has since been schooled in this thread and in the original thread (linked above, which is in VC&G). No harm done, all's well that ends well.

 

[Tk1]

I am so sorry! I have been away from the PC market for 2 years so I am off.

Sorry for the stupid question, but I understand it better now

I just dont want to make wrong mistake before I upgrade my CPU and Mobo!

Thanks for the understanding'

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Glad people are learning things

 

[Tk1]

Folks

I finally managed to o/c my Q6600 to just now 3330.3 (9 * 370)!

Before I changed my gfx card from 4870 to 560 Ti, I couldn't o/c this little babe to anything beyond 2.9, the system was very unstable.

A 38% increase in CPU speed, but the flight simulation game that I used to play only increased by 6 to 7 frames and is hanging around 18 ~ 19 FPS.

If I upgrade the CPU to i5 or even i7, would the game FPS improves beyond this figure?

 

[TemjinGold]

Seeing as we know nothing about the rest of your system, yes it will improve beyond this figure.

 

[Tk1]

My system spec is

Q6600
P5Q DEluxe
Powercolor 4870 1GB (changed)
Inno3D GTX 560 Ti OC (880/1020)
Cosair 750W PSU
2GB X 2 Cosair DDR2 RAM
Windows Vista 32

 

[cubeless]

bring up task manager and see if all 4 cpu's are 100% busy when you game now... if you do one thing and it's not consuming the current cpu, then you probably won't get too big a bump by upgrading... but your same oc'ing skills will get you ~4ghz with a 2500k...

maybe a win 7 64 (better for gaming than vista) and ssd upgrade would be better for overall performance for now...

 

[PlasmaBomb]

OP got it backwards...

Is a 2500k @ 2.4 GHz = Q6600 @ 3.3GHz?

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

The Q6600 is aging but no slouch.

Try lowering your resolution. If your FPS increase, you need more GPU power, if they do not, your CPU might be bottle-necking it.

 

[gevorg]

The Q6600 is still a great CPU, but this benchmark should answer your question OP:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=49

 

[Spikesoldier]

My system spec is

Q6600
P5Q DEluxe
Powercolor 4870 1GB (changed)
Inno3D GTX 560 Ti OC (880/1020)
Cosair 750W PSU
2GB X 2 Cosair DDR2 RAM
Windows Vista 32

try going to windows 7 64 bit. you will be able to use the 4th gig of ram in your system.

 

[Tk1]

The Q6600 is still a great CPU, but this benchmark should answer your question OP:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=49

This is great comparison chart! THANKS A MILLION!!

 

[Brunnis]

This is great comparison chart! THANKS A MILLION!!

It's the exact same chart I posted almost at the top of this thread...

A 38% increase in CPU speed, but the flight simulation game that I used to play only increased by 6 to 7 frames and is hanging around 18 ~ 19 FPS.

Well, the performance increase should be looked at as a percentage, not as the absolute number of frames per second increase. If the performance increased from 12 to 19 FPS, which you say it did, that would mean that your 39% clock frequency increase produced a 58% performance increase. And you sound disappointed by the this? What were you expecting?

To be honest, getting a higher than linear performance increase from an overclock isn't very likely. Either way, you should be quite happy with what you got from the overclock.

As for upgrading to a 2500K, it's hard to say how much of a difference it would make in this case. You could probably easily expect 40%, though. If you're lucky, the increase could be a bit higher than that as well.

 

[tweakboy]

Don't upgrade yet my friend. Wait for the Sandy Bridge E or IVY

The difference is not noticeable between Q6 and 2600k both used regular hard drives. Eventually SSD one day.

Played FEAR 3 on my friends Sandy + 580 and saw no difference between his comp or mine. Except that he has a 21 inch lcd and sucky logi mouse. My rig framerate is stuck at 60fps and never drops on any games. Then I played same games at home on my rig. Soo my games are good and dont take 100 percent CPU usage except for Crysis 2. All other games its 30 to 70 percent CPU usage. Also my DAW on avg takes 40 percent. No need to upgrade if you still have horsepower. Ok big deal it renders 2 minutes faster,, compared to 3 minutes... not a big deal.

Wait for new technology. The Core 2 series was groundbreaking,, earth shattering, is powerful. If I put a 2600k in your rig you wont notice a difference.

The difference in performance you will not notice. Wait for a 8 core or 12 core Intel . Or get a AMD server 16 core if you are rich.

If you want a performance upgrade that you will notice its speed is going to SSD ...

Folks

I finally managed to o/c my Q6600 to just now 3330.3 (9 * 370)!

Before I changed my gfx card from 4870 to 560 Ti, I couldn't o/c this little babe to anything beyond 2.9, the system was very unstable.

A 38% increase in CPU speed, but the flight simulation game that I used to play only increased by 6 to 7 frames and is hanging around 18 ~ 19 FPS.

If I upgrade the CPU to i5 or even i7, would the game FPS improves beyond this figure?

 

[tweakboy]

That is weird, GPU shouldnt have effect on OCing CPU. hmmm interesting..

 

[Tk1]

Don't upgrade yet my friend. Wait for the Sandy Bridge E or IVY

The difference is not noticeable between Q6 and 2600k both used regular hard drives. Eventually SSD one day.

Played FEAR 3 on my friends Sandy + 580 and saw no difference between his comp or mine. Except that he has a 21 inch lcd and sucky logi mouse. My rig framerate is stuck at 60fps and never drops on any games. Then I played same games at home on my rig. Soo my games are good and dont take 100 percent CPU usage except for Crysis 2. All other games its 30 to 70 percent CPU usage. Also my DAW on avg takes 40 percent. No need to upgrade if you still have horsepower. Ok big deal it renders 2 minutes faster,, compared to 3 minutes... not a big deal.

Wait for new technology. The Core 2 series was groundbreaking,, earth shattering, is powerful. If I put a 2600k in your rig you wont notice a difference.

The difference in performance you will not notice. Wait for a 8 core or 12 core Intel . Or get a AMD server 16 core if you are rich.

If you want a performance upgrade that you will notice its speed is going to SSD ...

Hi tweakboy,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply!

The bottom line is that visually, I insist on getting at least 30 frames per second. Afterall, this is what we get from watching DVD movies. Any motion below 30 frames per second is not playable.

So you're saying using SSD will improve frame rates? How does that happen?

I notice that you're also a Q6600'er and it's holding at 3.7GHz, that is what I managed to obtain. What I did was just changing the FSB from Auto to 410, then my Asus P5Q Deluxe BIOS automatically changed the VCore to 1.42~1.44 and set the multiplier to 9.0 which eventually gave me 3690MHz. I've just done this during the weekends, do you know of a method to ensure the stability of the overclock? For your information, I'm using Corsair H60 Hydro Fluid Cooler. What's your cooling solution?

You mentioned 2600K being the same performance as the Q6, I fear the same too. So with a i7/2600K + my current 560 Ti it won't make a difference?

 

[cusideabelincoln]

What tweakboy was saying wasn't that his friend's 2600k+GTX580 had the same performance as his Q6600+560Ti, but that both computers were getting over 60 fps. The 2600k+GTX580 will no doubt be faster. Not all games react the same way to CPU horsepower, so tweakboy might just be playing different games than you are.

You've also mentioned you've seen a performance improvement through overclocking your processor. This means your processor is holding back your card in the games you play. Not all games react the same, but apparently for your flight simulations the Q6600 is not enough. Upgrading to a 2500K (and overclocking it) will probably net you 30 fps in your flight sims.

 

[Tk1]

What tweakboy was saying wasn't that his friend's 2600k+GTX580 had the same performance as his Q6600+560Ti, but that both computers were getting over 60 fps. The 2600k+GTX580 will no doubt be faster. Not all games react the same way to CPU horsepower, so tweakboy might just be playing different games than you are.

You've also mentioned you've seen a performance improvement through overclocking your processor. This means your processor is holding back your card in the games you play. Not all games react the same, but apparently for your flight simulations the Q6600 is not enough. Upgrading to a 2500K (and overclocking it) will probably net you 30 fps in your flight sims.

Oh...actually, I've done a benchmark on my Q6600 @ 3.79GHz + 560 Ti (880/1020/2040) and the average is 83 for Far Cry 2 which is well above 60. For most of the FPS games that I own, they are all doing well over 60.

As far as flight simulations are concerned, I've new observations. Over the weekends, I tested out LOCKON Platinum, i.e. Flaming Cliff 2, it's not doing 60+ but it's well over 30 inside the cockpit. External views do 45+. As for Strike Fighter, the problematic one, I'm beginning to suspect it's has something to do with its coding. And you are right, it's heavily CPU bound.

I have a new case and a new cooler. Now all I need is a new CPU and a motherboard. I am just wondering should I get an i5 2500K or the i7 2600K. Somehow, I believe that some GPUs match with some CPUs. Like Q6600+4870 is a good match. Is 2500K + 560 Ti/570 a good match and 2600K + 580 another good match?

 

[toyota]

if gaming is your main concern then save 100 bucks and get a 2500k. you can look at the numerous reviews to see a 2600k offers nothing over the 2500k for gaming. that 100 bucks would be better spent towards the gpu.