• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Noobish question from a novice builder

J

Joeydubbs

Senior member
I'm comtemplating building a system and have decided to go for a quad (if I don't wait for nehalem) since I like the "future proof" aspect of it (plan to use system for about 4 years.) The last time I built a system, P4's were the rage (Athlon's too) and it was alll about clock speed, cache didnt seem to matter (at least to me it didn't.) Can someone please explain to me the major difference (performance wise) I would see between these quads? The clock speeds are comparable but the cache sizes and fsb's are different. I plan on running at stock speeds for everyday computing, gaming, light video editing, etc...

What's the big difference? (besides price of course 🙂 )

Q6600

Q9450

Thanks all in advance!
 
If you aren't an overclocker or a huge power user, you will likely be hard pressed to find much difference between these two. The addition of a few new instructions (SSE4) may or may not help you with your video editting, if or when your particular programs are updated to use them. Otherwise, the speed difference tends to be less than 10%. Pretty graphs from AnandTech's old review here.

Note that you could also split the difference in price and go for a Q9300. Again, you'll be hard pressed to feel much difference anywhere but your wallet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top