My Q6600 vs new procs?

[Darkstar757]

Ok,

I have a Q6600 right now and its over clocked to 3.0ghz. I want to know is it worth it to upgrade to a Q9650 or should i jusr wait for the Q9450?

 

[Riverhound777]

Uhh neither? If you think your current processor is too slow just overclock it more. You will gain more from upping it to 3.5ghz than upgradding to another CPU at stock and it wont cost you anything, unless you need a better cooler.

 

[The-Noid]

Q9450 is a much cheaper processor that will in most circumstances hit around the same overclock as the Qx9650.

Extreme Series is for people that get cpu's for free, need to be on the bleeding edge, or OEM business.

 

[DSF]

My question to you would be, what are you need a CPU to do that it isn't doing for you already?

 

[BLHealthy4life]

Originally posted by: Darkstar757
Ok,

I have a Q6600 right now and its over clocked to 3.0ghz. I want to know is it worth it to upgrade to a Q9650 or should i jusr wait for the Q9450?

1. Why do you only have it clocked to 3.0Ghz?

2. no it's not worth it to go to QX9650, you have A LOT more headroom in your Q6600

3. You can wait for the Q9450 if you want of course, however, if your cooler isn't up to par (maybe why you only are at 3.00, then the Q9450 isn't going to give a whole lot more...however, it will have larger cache and slightly faster clock for clock..

 

[LOUISSSSS]

how does a q6600 @3.5 ghz stand up to each of the new 45 nm cpu @ stock speeds?

 

[james1701]

Originally posted by: Riverhound777
Uhh neither? If you think your current processor is too slow just overclock it more. You will gain more from upping it to 3.5ghz than upgradding to another CPU at stock and it wont cost you anything, unless you need a better cooler.

That would be good advice, if every Q6600 and mother board would do 3.5ghz. I would wait till Nel. comes out myself.

 

[Markfw]

most Q5500 G0's will do 3.5 with good air cooling, and a decent motherboard. I have 3 out of 3 that do it (well, one is 3430, could probably get it to 3500, but haven't spent the time))

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
most Q5500 G0's will do 3.5 with good air cooling, and a decent motherboard. I have 3 out of 3 that do it (well, one is 3430, could probably get it to 3500, but haven't spent the time))

Make mine a 4th GO with good air cooling and good motherboard to hit at minimum 3.5

 

[LOUISSSSS]

but how does a Q6600 @ 3.5ghz compare with the new Q9650 Yorkfield and its relatives?

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
but how does a Q6600 @ 3.5ghz compare with the new Q9650 Yorkfield and its relatives?

Who cares at $1100 vs $250....They may be a little faster, but not 4 x 3500 or 14000 !

 

[Zenoth]

The architecture revision would give roughly 5% average better performance (some times lower, some times higher due to SSE4 and programs using it, like video encoding, which in that case can be quite better on the new 45nm revision). By over-clocking your current Q6600 an extra 200Mhz or 300Mhz you could well reach exactly that 5% (or probably more) performance that you seem to seek so much. But overall you don't need to upgrade at all, your Q6600 will be good until Nehalem arrives.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

If it's a B3 stepping, expect to get to around 3.2, although I've seen where it was OC'd with air-cooling to around 3.4 and VCORE of 1.46V.

For me, that Vcore setting is too high. I can get to 3.2 with 1.42V.

The G0 -- that's a different ball-game.

I'm only running at 3.15, and it's fast enough.

The P5W DH as I recall, uses and INtel chipset -- 975, isn't it? I'd try and get more mileage out of the Q6600, regardless of the stepping.

 

[james1701]

The 975 is an Intel chipset. Its almost a couple of years old now. I can not get my Q6600 to be stable above 3.15 ghz. It may be my board thats limiting me. I was going to get a new board, but I think I will wait another year until the second revision of the Nehlam comes out. I hope it will be almost as big a boost as going from my P4 to the Q6600.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: james1701
The 975 is an Intel chipset. Its almost a couple of years old now. I can not get my Q6600 to be stable above 3.15 ghz. It may be my board thats limiting me. I was going to get a new board, but I think I will wait another year until the second revision of the Nehlam comes out. I hope it will be almost as big a boost as going from my P4 to the Q6600.

lol i doubt it...
the P4 -> q6600 is kind of like going from acorolla to a NSX

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Q9450 is a much cheaper processor that will in most circumstances hit around the same overclock as the Qx9650.

Not with the 8x multiplier it won't. The Q9450 would struggle to get to 4GHz since it would take a 500MHz FSB to attain such speeds, beyond what most mobos can handle.

 

[Deadwolf13]

Question:
How does the Q6600 @ 2.4 stand up to the Q9300 @ 2.5 that is going to be released in four days?

 

[Zenoth]

Everything has been answered in recent previews. Just keep in mind that the new architecture revision on the 45nm process gives roughly 5% (average) performance increase, clock for clock. Have that in mind and you're set. That means the difference is negigible in real-world performance (gaming, mostly, but anything else outside of benchmarking too). You'd see the difference in numbers from SuperPI results and 3DMark06 results, but you wouldn't notice anything like +15FPS in Crysis just because you "upgraded" to the 45nm models at the same speed.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

On the chipset angle, I have to trade off -- or optimize -- between "bleeding edge" and "reliable, mature, debugged" operation.

If the chipset is compatible with the latest processors, then the drawbacks may include earlier version of disk controller, compatibility only with prior PCI-E standard -- things like that.

Getting a good board with the 680i chipset was a gamble for me -- not the sort of thing I usually do. I waited until it had matured a bit. Now a should be looking at the newer intel chipsets. With my "gamble," I'm not in a hurry, but a lot of people have grown disgusted with nVidia 680i.

I'd think, though, that there are enough boards released through latter-2007 that have a track record, it's probably worth it to go ahead now.