Originally posted by: VulcanX
Ok thanks a lot guys, really appreciate it, and btw regarding bryanw1995 its not fair on someone who is starting up on OCing to just humiliate them because they do actually know whats happening, but it shows the type of person they, are, but thanks okes really appreciate your help
He wasn't trying to humiliate you, he was merely stating what he assumed to be the truth. You seem to have a general grasp of building computers but not Intel's current processor lineup... and regardless, there's nothing wrong with saying you don't know anything about a subject. Getting defensive doesn't help you learn.
Originally posted by: VulcanX
And i can get myself the E8400, how do those compare to the E6850 for instance or the E7200? and the Quads just seem to get too hot by the looks of it and if i get a cooler it wont be anything hectic, like maybe $40-50 but nothing too intense, just wana overclock the motherboard the most. but lets still see if i can first get a buyer, but thanks for your advice guys
The E8400 has more cache than the E7200, which is the major difference between the two. Both can be overclocked rather high (4.0 on air fairly easy), although iirc the E7200 can't do quite as much consistently. For gaming the extra cache on the E8400 will help but overall the price saving might be worth going down a step, depending on how much you want to spend. The E6850 is on an older process and will run hotter, but I'm not sure how it compares against the 45nm counterparts.
If you're still looking for a quad (if you need the cores... F@H comes to mind!) the Q9300 and Q9450 are quite cool at 3.0 or 3.2 ghz. To quote Brian again, "He could get a Q9300 and clock it to 3.0 on the stock heatsink and be fine. It would run MUCH MUCH cooler than the Q6600, and he does live in SA after all." So if I were you I would choose between the options listed, you will be pleased regardless.
Facebook
Twitter