Will a Q6700 over=clock higher than a Q6600?

[jawknee530]

Will it? Or will they over-clock the same and one would just be paying for the higher multiplier in the Q6700 so one wouldn't have to put as much strain on his/her FSB and RAM?

 

[myocardia]

Nobody knows for sure how high any chip will overclock. But with either of those quads, you're going to be limited by the heat they produce, not by your multiplier. Your chances of the higher overclock are with a Q6600, though, since they can be had in G0 steppings, and the Q6700 isn't yet, at least as far as I know.

 

[GFORCE100]

Originally posted by: myocardia
Nobody knows for sure how high any chip will overclock. But with either of those quads, you're going to be limited by the heat they produce, not by your multiplier. Your chances of the higher overclock are with a Q6600, though, since they can be had in G0 steppings, and the Q6700 isn't yet, at least as far as I know.

The QX6700 was only available in a B3 stepping.

The Q6700 however is available only as a G0 stepping.

It all depends on the yield. With either CPU you can attain 3.6GHz but only if the yield lets you. The lower the VID setting, the more chance you'll have in theory.

 

[wittangamo]

IMHO, you're better off with the lower multiplier. As far as strain on the ram, with the Q6600, running DDR 800 in spec at 1:1 gives you 3.6 ghz at 9x. You've got a much better chance of hitting that than 10x400=4ghz on the Q6700.

Save your money.

 

[nyker96]

I think they max out about the same, with a 8x multiplier of q6600, you probably get better performance with a higher FSB at the end.

 

[firewolfsm]

Originally posted by: wittangamo
IMHO, you're better off with the lower multiplier. As far as strain on the ram, with the Q6600, running DDR 800 in spec at 1:1 gives you 3.6 ghz at 9x. You've got a much better chance of hitting that than 10x400=4ghz on the Q6700.

Save your money.

You do know you can lower a multiplier right?

 

[aigomorla]

well heres the problem.

For a 1x multi increase the chip is almost double the price.

The 10x multi will help a lot in the lower range overclocking. Expecially if your ram limited. However with DDR800 ram, not many people are hitting ram walls. And if you are, then you must be pushing that fsb super high for the lowest divider not to work.

i believe if you were on water, the 10x multi might be great. 10x400fsb = 4ghz. But the voltage requirements for that would be roughly around 1.50-1.55Vcore. Something definitely dangerous to try on air.


The best bang for the buck with great oc potential is the Q6600. The Q6700 would be more aimed at people who dont overclock but want a great quadcore. If your getting the Q6700 for ocing, i honestly dont think its recomended unless your on water or greater.

 

[wittangamo]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm

Originally posted by: wittangamo
IMHO, you're better off with the lower multiplier. As far as strain on the ram, with the Q6600, running DDR 800 in spec at 1:1 gives you 3.6 ghz at 9x. You've got a much better chance of hitting that than 10x400=4ghz on the Q6700.

Save your money.

You do know you can lower a multiplier right?

Yes. But can you explain why anyone would pay more for a chip with a 10X multi just so they could set it back down to 9X or lower?

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: nyker96
I think they max out about the same, with a 8x multiplier of q6600, you probably get better performance with a higher FSB at the end.

Q6600 is 9x, Q6700 is 10x.