This is history but...q6600 vs. Penryn clock for clock?

[soccerballtux]

?

 

[Cutthroat]

It depends on the app, but in general they are the same clock for clock. Penryn was only a 'tick' the architecture is the same but it's a smaller process, has a larger cache usually, and has SSE4 instructions.

 

[myocardia]

With most apps (assuming they're single or dual-threaded, not multithreaded, and the app doesn't use SSE 4.1), the Penryn has a ~5% performance advantage, at the same clock speed, but it can be a bit higher in cache-dependent apps, and lower in a few apps.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: myocardia
With most apps (assuming they're single or dual-threaded, not multithreaded, and the app doesn't use SSE 4.1), the Penryn has a ~5% performance advantage, at the same clock speed, but it can be a bit higher in cache-dependent apps, and lower in a few apps.

Hi guys, thanks for the quick replies.

I'm looking specifically at multithreaded benefits, because this processor upgrade would be the last upgrade in a long time.

Sounds like the extra cache would get put to use in the future.

 

[RussianSensation]

Penryn vs. Conroe

Depending on the app as low as 0%, as high as 10.5%. However, in SSE4.1 situations it could be 50-60+% faster (like DivX 6.8+ video conversion). You should upgrade when the apps you want to run benefit from a quad. If they do then go for something like a Q9550 and OC that bad boy.