Need help picking CPU: Q6600, e6750 or e6850?

[mukkey]

I am building a new gaming rig and want it to run Crysis well. I have decided to go with the eVGA SLI A1 or T1 board and run a couple of 880GT's. Now I am trying to decide what CPU to buy. I am mostly considering the Q6600 or the e6850, but am also thinking about the e6750 for the $90 savings. What should I do? Thanks!

 

[RussianSensation]

Without overclocking the dual core 3.0ghz is going to be the fastest cpu for most current games, including Crysis. With overclocking I'd take the Q6600 which will reach 3.4-3.5ghz with the top air coolers. I also don't particularly recommend SLI since in a year's time a single card for the same price or lower tends to outperform them (i.e. 8800GT > 7950GT SLI, etc).

Welcome to AnandTech

 

[mukkey]

Thanks for the welcome

I wanted to take advantage of the 8800 GT's price and go SLI. I figure when the next set of cards come out, anything that is worth the upgrade will be more than I want to spend. I'd rather get the most powerful setup now while I can save the cash and push back the inevitable upgrade as long as possible. If that makes sense.

 

[graysky]

q6600 all the way. 4 cores @ 9x333=3.0 GHz is better than 2 cores @ 3.2 or whatever.

 

[CDC Mail Guy]

I was in the same predicament. Quad is out (for now), and I am stuck between the 6750 and 6850 C2D. 6750 for the fact that as OP stated, is $90.00 less. I recently found out my P4 3.2GHz Prescott is SEVERELY bottlenecking my 8800GT, and I can barely play Crysis at medium settings.

After RussianSensation's post, I think I'll go with the 6850, as it'll be on credit, and the $90 won't "really" matter

Board= http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813127030

 

[Acanthus]

On a side note, application are starting to utilise quad core.

 

[badnewcastle]

Here's a little food for thought...

Comparison dual vs. quad...

Seems as though for games at least right now, the dual is winning the battle... You could get the E6750, put some of the $90 towards a HSF and put a modest OC on it and you be faster then the E6850...

Read the article to see if you want to go with quad... I know for Crysis, there is a review that says the game isn't playing on 4 cores any better then 2 cores here.

I know I can play Crysis w/dx9 tweaks everything very high and shadows on medium, 1280x1024 and FPS range from 20-30 depending on situation, but it was very playable all the way to the VERY disappointing end...

 

[mukkey]

I am basically going for the same kind of settings as the above poster has, but I am also going for a new 22" monitor so I am looking to hit a resolution of 1680x1050. Will that be doable? I'm also not sure if I'm going SLI right off the bat. With everything else, I have to see if I can squeeze out another $280 for the second card. So I want to hit those settings with hopefully 1 card.

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: mukkey
I am basically going for the same kind of settings as the above poster has, but I am also going for a new 22" monitor so I am looking to hit a resolution of 1680x1050. Will that be doable? I'm also not sure if I'm going SLI right off the bat. With everything else, I have to see if I can squeeze out another $280 for the second card. So I want to hit those settings with hopefully 1 card.

the resolution will be more dependent on the video card and how much ram it has. 512mb is good for that res.

 

[Acanthus]

If youre overclocking, it makes no sense at all to get dual core.

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
If youre overclocking, it makes no sense at all to get dual core.

unless of course you are BROKE like me.

 

[w00t]

I'd go Q6600

It will play Crysis fine and have a greater duration in the tech world.

quad > dual

 

[GuitarDaddy]

I would wait for the 45nm wolfdales in January, the early ES samples are clocking way over 4ghz on air.

 

[asdftt123]

Personally, it's a choice of the E6750 or Q6600. Go for value and OC or go for four cores. If you want better OCing potential then wait for Penryn...if not, then there's no reason to wait.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

The only drawback on "waiting for Penryn" -- the initial price schedule may put a dent in the wallet if you opt for the upper end of the product line.

I got a B3 stepping of the Q6600 for not waiting a few weeks to at least have a CHANCE of getting the G0.

But I have no complaints. None whatever. It's running at 3.2 Ghz, air-cooled, and VCORE less than 5% above the retail-box maximum spec.

I wound up with a spare mobo and the initial E6600 processor that was replaced with the quad, and will be putting together a VISTA system out of those parts soon. I only regret that these boards are only certified for the Wolfsdale double-cores, and not the Penryn quads. Why or how that's the case when I'm running a Kentsfield right now -- I'm not sure . . .

 

[mukkey]

Thanks for all the input. I've decided to go with the Q6600. Next I have to decide whether or not to go SLI. Anyone know if the evga 680i A1 or T1 boards will support the Penryns?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I can only say -- check the manufacturer web-site. My 680i board is a Striker Extreme (ASUS). It's cert-ed for the Wolfsdale Penryn, but not the quad-version. I haven't kept up with other 680i brands.

On the SLI angle, I chose my board to allow me use of a PCI_E hardware RAID controller together with two VGAs in SLI. But I've had input from some IT people -- conservative types -- who don't like SLI, and I'm watching my utility-bill. My PSU will support it, but I'm not inclined to budget for both the hardware and the cost of "juice."

I just don't think I need it -- I'm running a BFG 8800 GTS 640MB VGA, modestly over-clocked. I may just stand pat with a single vid-card and watch the prices on either Kentsfield or Penryn processors rated for 1,333 Mhz FSB. . . . . and see, if, how, or when this particular mobo will ever handle a quad-core Penryn.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: mukkey
Anyone know if the evga 680i A1 or T1 boards will support the Penryns?

They don't yet. They've said that they will, with a BIOS update, but as far as I know, nobody has released a Penryn compatible BIOS for them yet.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Yeah, this pissin match between Intel and nVidia is getting pretty stupid. Good ole mexican standoff, and the consumer is paying the price. No platform that will support top of the line CPU and GPU's:thumbsdown:

I think Intel is being rather stupid, they should realize that GPU is king in the gaming market and just pay nVidia the damn royalty they want and price Intel SLI chipsets accordingly. nVidia will enventually crack the code and make their chipset recongize the CPU's and will have a commanding advantage in the gamer market when they do.

 

[taltamir]

buy cheap, upgrade often... and sell on ebay

 

[nitro28]

EDIT: When I originally published this article and looked at the graph of the processor performance capture my first impression was that Crysis was utilizing all four cores - which is true. Crysis is passing instructions to all four cores but not maximizing their ability to handle instructions concurrently. All four cores look busy in the graph but the reality of it is that they are basically operating as a single-core and taking turns. In it's current state Crysis does not take full advantage of multi-core processing. Thanks go out to the readers who pointed this out.

Thanks for pointing that out badnewcastle. I read that article the very first day it was out and was sold on quad core. Now after that edit, I am thinking overclocked 6750 and then buy a 45nm quad next year when they get reasonable. The 6750 should be more than enough for games until then (except Crysis of course which kills all!)