• 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.

Q8200

7x multi = the sux0r for overclocking. You'd struggle to hit 3.2GHz with this chip due to FSB limitations. Unless you're looking to run stock, stick with the Q6600 folks.
 
Originally posted by: jellyrole
But at that price you could get the Q6600 with 9x multiplier 4.05(theoretically).

Almost correct....Getting the q6600 to 4.05 for the "normal" user will be quite a feat! 😉I would say 3.4 realistically. Still the price/performance/multi, the q6600 is a great buy.



 
Originally posted by: khurios2000
7x450 may be still attainable?

With the right mobo, yes. But thats still 'only' 3.15GHz. Also its only got 4MB L2 cache (compared with 12MB for the Q9x50s and 6MB for the Q9x00s), so despite being based on the Yorkfield core it'll probably only just match Kentsfield per clock.

On the plus side it'll run cooler than the Q6600, and has SSE4.1... I guess those looking at mild ~3GHz overclocks may consider this as well.
 
Will be interesting to see how that relatively small cache hurts it, especially for gaming.

That multiplier is horrible ;cuddles his Q6600;

😉
 
Originally posted by: harpoon84
7x multi = the sux0r for overclocking. You'd struggle to hit 3.2GHz with this chip due to FSB limitations. Unless you're looking to run stock, stick with the Q6600 folks.

Word up. Don't even THINK about that chip if you want to do any OCing. the 6600 is a much better buy and a much better chip dollar for dollar. Intel is also offering the Q6700 for a reduced price, which has a 10X multiplier.
 
Back
Top