Another one of those "this or that" QX6850 vs Q6600

C

cahl

n00b
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
42
I was looking at the Q6600/QX6700/Xeon 3220 ..

Then I read
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_extreme_qx6850/
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3038
I have to admit .. It's tempting ..
It seems it whoops everything, even tho it's listed at 1000 bucks.
Suppose "bang for buck" will be the Q6600 .. but .. it's so .. shiny .. must .. resist ..
I play in windowed mode, irc, edit webpages, do a lil CAD everything at once .. so perhaps .. I really need it, hehe =D
 
Q6600 Overclocked > QX6700/QX6800 Overclocked

They should overclock nearly the same. They'll have an upper ceiling of around 3.6GHz and most will only be able to do 3.0-3.2GHz with air cooling and 3.2-3.4GHz on water. These chips just run super hot and they are hard to cool as a result. Since those chips have the same basic overclocking headroom, the main difference is going to be the unlocked multiplier in the other processors. Most people will tell you that it's not worth the extra cost for an unlocked multiplier. Obviously, I agree or I'd be running one of those expensive mothers myself.
 
Dan_D said:
Q6600 Overclocked > QX6700/QX6800 Overclocked

They should overclock nearly the same. They'll have an upper ceiling of around 3.6GHz and most will only be able to do 3.0-3.2GHz with air cooling and 3.2-3.4GHz on water. These chips just run super hot and they are hard to cool as a result. Since those chips have the same basic overclocking headroom, the main difference is going to be the unlocked multiplier in the other processors. Most people will tell you that it's not worth the extra cost for an unlocked multiplier. Obviously, I agree or I'd be running one of those expensive mothers myself.
Click to expand...
Aha. I suppose if I overclock I can save quite a bit.
How is the QX6800 vs the QX6850 then? I fell of the cpu-wagon a long time ago :(
 
X3210, why? because its cheaper and you can over clock it 3ghz - 3.5ghz easily.
 
cahl said:
Aha. I suppose if I overclock I can save quite a bit.
How is the QX6800 vs the QX6850 then? I fell of the cpu-wagon a long time ago :(
Click to expand...

Why are you even asking this question. There's no need to spend the money.

1) Q6600
2) Overclock
3) Save money
4) ...
5) Profit. Or was that 3)
 
cahl said:
Aha. I suppose if I overclock I can save quite a bit.
How is the QX6800 vs the QX6850 then? I fell of the cpu-wagon a long time ago :(
Click to expand...

QX6800 2.93GHz, 1066MHz FSB vs. QX6850 3.0GHz, 1333MHz FSB
 
Many people who recommend the Q6600 have a point, but those who make 386523 posts about saying the Q6600 is cheaper (blah blah) should remind themselves that many people who are looking at the QX6700/6800+ are probably not concerned about money. :rolleyes:

Just a thought :D
 
perry753 said:
Many people who recommend the Q6600 have a point, but those who make 386523 posts about saying the Q6600 is cheaper (blah blah) should remind themselves that many people who are looking at the QX6700/6800+ are probably not concerned about money. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Some people are and some people are not. I think that some people are going to spend the money because they feel they have to in order to get something but the truth is they can sometimes get the same results for less. Once that's explained and they understand that, I'd agree. If you have the cash, you know what you are getting into, or you simply want the best at that time, then by all means spend the money.

I'm far from frugal as I am sure you can all tell, but I never spring for Extreme Edition CPUs because they are replaced so frequently and because they don't tend to overclock a whole lot better than their standard counterparts. I skip them to save some money, but only because I don't think that the QX6850 gives me $700 more performance or functionality than the $266.00 Q6600.
 
Now, me, I would go for the Q6600 only because I've some experience overclocking so it's highly stable so a [email protected] with the G0 stepping should be no problem even with a lower budget board.

P35 all the way though (until X38).

The E6850 may be clocked faster but most benchmarks take quad core into effect now and games will slowly go towards quad core so you'll get longevity.

Plus if you use a lot of apps quad core will naturally help.
 
Somewhat on topic, I noticed that HP has a media center pc with the Q6600 for around $1100
Click to expand...

Is it just me or has anyone noticed HP have been including really lame video cards with their machines lately?
 
mwarps said:
Why are you even asking this question. There's no need to spend the money.

1) Q6600
2) Overclock
3) Save money
4) ...
5) Profit. Or was that 3)
Click to expand...

All valid points. But the Q6600 will do what .. 3.2 on air?
firingsquad.com said:
Once again we nearly hit the 4GHz mark, as the QX6850 OC’ed to 3.81GHz at 423MHz FSB. At that speed we needed 1.4875V to ensure maximum stability.
Click to expand...
I guess the answer to my question is "Yes, if you feel like spending 5 times as much for 15% more performance, go ahead". We'll see what the QX6850 will be after the slash, perhaps .. perhaps ..
 
Valkhorn said:
Is it just me or has anyone noticed HP have been including really lame video cards with their machines lately?
Click to expand...
OEMs, HP included, have never been know for including nice video cards. Enthusiasts build heir own boxen.

-bZj
 
Another thing to consider is that overclocking uses alot more power to run that computer. Not a big issue to some, but when you have several Folding boxes all overclocked, it gets harsh on the electric bill.

I used to be in the buy an X2 3800 and overclock the crap out of it for Folding, camp. But I just have to get the electric bill down. The overclocks are coming off, back to stock speed in many cases.
 
Bill Clo said:
Another thing to consider is that overclocking uses alot more power to run that computer. Not a big issue to some, but when you have several Folding boxes all overclocked, it gets harsh on the electric bill.

I used to be in the buy an X2 3800 and overclock the crap out of it for Folding, camp. But I just have to get the electric bill down. The overclocks are coming off, back to stock speed in many cases.
Click to expand...

In part that's why I only midly overclock my other machines, or sometimes I don't overclock them at all.
 
Valkhorn said:
Is it just me or has anyone noticed HP have been including really lame video cards with their machines lately?
Click to expand...

They can't help it. Nvidia and Ati both have been putting out crappy low end cards with no real mid-range card that supports DX10. The previous generation 7000 from nvidia still outperforms the 8400,8500, 8600's and the crap that Ati has put out too like the 2400 and the 2600 are not any better.

If the point was to run Dx10 and only that then thats what these cards do. And really thats what HP wants.

But if you're a true gamer then you cant settle for anything less than a 8800 card or the 2900 offering from Ati. Just my 2 cents
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top