Upgrade My Core 2 E6600

[Diversian]

Hi, I'm trying to cost effectively upgrade my processor. I'd like to go Quad Core, as I have been using a lot of graphic editing software lately. However, I am a gamer at heart! So:

• I'm trying to keep at around $220.
  I'd like to get a Quad 775
  Improving my Vista score to 5.9 would be pretty nice (it's sitting at 5.2 - 5.4oc@3.1)
  Upping any gaming framerates would be nice (2x8800gtx sli atm)

Please help me find a suitable processor. I was considering the Q9400. Any thoughts? It's up 95w from 65w?

 

[polarbear6]

At the price point 220 bucks i feel that q9400 is the best.
i dont have much opinion about the q8200

 

[TurtleCrusher]

take my opinion however you will, but the Q8200 scores 5.9 at stock, so right there you'd get what you want. Overclocking the Q8200 was somewhat difficult, but i didn't have an intel CPU since a P3 celeron, so i was lost.

I am quite happy with my purchase. I paid $190 and its worth every penny. At a current $165 its pretty awesome. Don't be fooled by its lower clock speed and lower L2 cache as it doesn't affect performance like you would imagine. It trades blows and typically comes out ahead against the Q6600 at lower temps and voltage. Overclocking the Q8200 gets interesting results. My current OC is directly comparable to the Q6600 at 3.2ghz. Reason is because of the high FSB.

I had the money to splurge, but i felt as if spending more would net me less performance for my $$. I always weigh performance/$$ in all of my components. Just take a look at my system. Everything is mid-range and was purchased on cheap (besides my CPU).

 

[Denithor]

Check to make sure your motherboard will support the 45nm quads before you buy one - many of the 680i boards could not be updated due to electrical issues (could not regulate the volts at the lower levels properly for the newer chips).

And honestly - don't worry about what the Vista benchmark says about your setup - it's still quite viable for today's tasks, especially gaming.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Originally posted by: Denithor
Check to make sure your motherboard will support the 45nm quads before you buy one - many of the 680i boards could not be updated due to electrical issues (could not regulate the volts at the lower levels properly for the newer chips).

And honestly - don't worry about what the Vista benchmark says about your setup - it's still quite viable for today's tasks, especially gaming.

Ditto on that. 680i was compatible with Wolfdale C2D's, but not the Yorkfield C2Q's -- one of which you are considering here.

So the best upgrade you can make, FOR YOUR EXISTING HARDWARE, is probably an E8600 C2D.

Your options, for purpose of using a C2Q (Yorkfield) quad-core processor:

-- replace the 680i board with something like the 780i (750i should do, I think).

-- replace the 680i board with a board based on an Intel chipset like P45.

Those options should allow you to continue using the DDR2-800 RAM.

If you don't think an E8600 C2D is sufficient, and you can't see the worth in upgrading the motherboard, going with I7 processors, motherboard and DDR3 RAM would be even more expensive -- overall.

 

[Diversian]

I thoroughly appreciate all of your responses. I was worried after I saw yours, but then found that the Yorkfield was supported (and it is very rare) on my particular board.
Yorkfield and MSI P6N Diamond

So, I'm all about saving money, and if I can get sufficient performance from the 8200 without overclocking, then that's probably the direction I'll head. I "like" to overclock, but being that it's my main atm, I'd rather focus on the stability first, and then play with it a little later. But, I look up at Ganesh1 and he has his e8400 at 4ghz, which is impressive. Also, I'm not so worried abou the Vista scores other than that it quickly bothered me thinking my cpu was my only bottleneck in comparison to the other hardware.

Oh, one additional thing I'd like to add. I'm running 2xGTX's w/768mb and was considering upgrading just one of them if I can get a noticeable performance jump (I'm running 1920x1200 often but without AA. AF doesn't seem to visibly effect my performance.) I'm on a budget, so I was trying to keep it at ~150 (if possible and logical), but if the new processor satisfies, there may be no real need. Just weighing my options, and trying to get the best performance for higher rez.

Thank you all for the help, it really is appreciated.

 

[soccerballtux]

My processor with 1MB of cache gets a 5.7 on the CPU experience index. This benchmark ultimately means nothing though, you don't need to worry about it.

Is your motherboard able to overclock further? If you could push your chip to 3.6 you'd be golden with your 9800GTX SLI, no need to upgrade. What are your CPU temps at load and voltages? With your chip you can safely take it to 1.5Vcore in CPU-z (assuming your temps stay below about 70C). What does this get you?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Originally posted by: Diversian
I thoroughly appreciate all of your responses. I was worried after I saw yours, but then found that the Yorkfield was supported (and it is very rare) on my particular board.
Yorkfield and MSI P6N Diamond

. . . .
Thank you all for the help, it really is appreciated.

That's really quite amazing, that MSI was an exception to the commonly known limitations for the 680i.

I suggest you update the BIOS from the status-quo for your E6600. BIOS revisions will account for such things as new-processor "1333 FSB." New BIOS might also improve reliability of thermal monitoring.

 

[Diversian]

Whoops. 8800 GTX's, not a 9800. I'll check voltages and repost when I get home tonight. I'll also try upping prior to post too 1.5 since I'm thinking it's at like 1.3. Temp is low at ~ 43. Ahh.. and BIoS update, however I couldn't get the MSI site to load (10 min ago.)

Any thoughts on the Q8300 at all? I didn't see anyone mention that.

 

[soccerballtux]

Diversian don't put your vcore at 1.5 unless 43 is your load temp. What is your load temp when running 2 instances of Prime95 or when running Orthos small? Going from 1.3 to 1.5 would be way too much. You'll need to do it in increments.

8800GTXs are, IIRC, exactly the same as 9800GTXs. Or very very similar. Most of the 9800GTs were just repackaged 8800GTs. Only later did they start shipping 55nm 9800GTs.

I'm jealous of the people that went SLI'd 8800GTX's+Q6600 OC when they came out. The ones that got a Q6600GT to 3.6Ghz really have no need to upgrade, even now, years after that hardware was available.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

The Q8300 is approximately as fast as the Q6700. Its only a minor clock speed increase. I would just OC a Q8200 just a smidge and you saved yourself.. $15?

I would hop on the Q8300. I didn't know they already came down that low. Last time i checked it was at $215.

 

[Diversian]

Hey! there's a Q8200 at microcenter near me for $139, but a Q9400 for $179. What do you think? Limited quantity, and in Chicago (about a 45 min drive). Remember, I'm currently only using an E6600.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Diversian
Hey! there's a Q8200 at microcenter near me for $139, but a Q9400 for $179. What do you think? Limited quantity, and in Chicago (about a 45 min drive). Remember, I'm currently only using an E6600.

For the price difference, go with the Q9400, definately. I might not feel the same if the Q8200 was still at $100, as it was last week.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Its a toss up. Its a 23% price premium for 10-30% better performance. If you are comfortable with overclocking the Q8200, at 2.8ghz (what most people get real easy) you won't have to worry about your CPU for a long time.

Stock settings? I'd personally get the Q9400. The Q9400 OC's a bit better, but you won't really have to.