• 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.

Should I upgrade E6750 to Q6600??????

M

mjavid

Member
Hi,
I am currently running an E6750 on an Intel DP35DP mobo with 2 Gig RAM. My OS is WinXP Prof. I don't overclock. I use Nikon Capture and Photoshop CS2 and I plan on doing a fair no. of video encodings. Are there any significant advantages to replacing the E6750 with a Q6600 G0 CPU? Or will I just be wasting my money????

I also have a 450W Asus A45 PSU, will this be enough? (I have 3 12v fans, 2 SATA-2 drives in RAID 0, a Nvidia GS8400 PCI-e card, a LG DVD burner and old LS-120 drive)

Thanks,

MJ
 
Well the E6750 is a new chip so I assume you just bought it... So don't get a Q6600 now... wait till Penryn or Nehalem or later even, otherwise you just sent your money down the drain on the E6750... unless you can sell it for a large part of its worth.
 
Originally posted by: LightningRider
..... otherwise you just sent your money down the drain on the E6750... unless you can sell it for a large part of its worth.
Click to expand...


I think I will be able to exchange the E6750 with the dealer after paying extra, so I don't think I'll lose much money that way. I did get it a few weeks ago!

I will have to spend money replacing the ASUS PSU with a Corsair HX-620 though!

 
Originally posted by: nanaki333
if you're running XP pro, don't bother
Click to expand...

Where'd you get that idea? XP Pro will run two Q6600's just fine, and both Photoshop and nearly all video encoding apps will take advantage of each and every available core.
 
I wouldn't say it'll be worth it. You probably don't see a need for an upgrade now and you probably won't see much of a difference afterwards.
 
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: nanaki333
if you're running XP pro, don't bother
Click to expand...

Where'd you get that idea? XP Pro will run two Q6600's just fine, and both Photoshop and nearly all video encoding apps will take advantage of each and every available core.
Click to expand...

Actually, this is wrong. Photoshop CS2 will not read more than 2 cores. In fact, even Photoshop CS3 won't gain anything from more than 2 cores. There is no reason to go from a Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad right now.
 
Originally posted by: AmdInside
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: nanaki333
if you're running XP pro, don't bother
Click to expand...

Where'd you get that idea? XP Pro will run two Q6600's just fine, and both Photoshop and nearly all video encoding apps will take advantage of each and every available core.
Click to expand...

Actually, this is wrong. Photoshop CS2 will not read more than 2 cores. In fact, even Photoshop CS3 won't gain anything from more than 2 cores. There is no reason to go from a Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad right now.
Click to expand...

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/c...ad-q6600_11.html#sect0
 
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: AmdInside
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: nanaki333
if you're running XP pro, don't bother
Click to expand...

Where'd you get that idea? XP Pro will run two Q6600's just fine, and both Photoshop and nearly all video encoding apps will take advantage of each and every available core.
Click to expand...

Actually, this is wrong. Photoshop CS2 will not read more than 2 cores. In fact, even Photoshop CS3 won't gain anything from more than 2 cores. There is no reason to go from a Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad right now.
Click to expand...

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/c...ad-q6600_11.html#sect0
Click to expand...

Don't you just love the trend in the last 6 months on Anandtech of people just stating their opinion as fact without providing any proof as if it's common sense 😉?
 
You should be able to get a 30% OC on that motha, try that first and see if it helps your encoding time. Beyond that, I'd wait for Penryn
 
Originally posted by: AmdInside
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: nanaki333
if you're running XP pro, don't bother
Click to expand...

Where'd you get that idea? XP Pro will run two Q6600's just fine, and both Photoshop and nearly all video encoding apps will take advantage of each and every available core.
Click to expand...

Actually, this is wrong. Photoshop CS2 will not read more than 2 cores. In fact, even Photoshop CS3 won't gain anything from more than 2 cores. There is no reason to go from a Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad right now.
Click to expand...


Keep telling that to yourself. That is a classic line coming from someone with a dual core that has no budget to get a quad core cpu. Enjoy your 100% load with Bioshock and MOH:Airborne, and all the other next gen games coming out in the fall. What's that? You dont play games? Its ok, I can still encode and render everything else faster than you.

So what is this "no reason" you speak of? Care to enlighten us? Is it a 5 year old game? Is it a single-threaded audio encoder? I can list the single-threaded applications I use with one hand: cs 1.6, BF2, Lame MP3 and Vorbis OGG. Everything else I use is multi-threaded.

OP: you should definitely invest in a Q6600. It will do you much good for what you are going to use it for.
 
how is the heat in your room? One thing you might consider is keeping the e6750 until penryn, then upgrade to a quad with much lower heat output.
 
Since you can exchange and pay the difference, go for the quad. I've been very happy with how much more I can encode with my Q6600 compared to my E6400. Just today, I've swapped my original B3 for a G0 stepping. 10C drop at stock. Currently playing around with undervolting. Down to 1.06V and full load temps are only 43C.
 
well depending on what the difference in price is i'd say do it.

i mean a quad is like $70 more than a e6750 at most places now, so if its only a $70 or so difference, that seems like a great dela for some future proofing.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top