3rd Quarter 65nm price cuts?

I

Itchyeyes

Gawd
Joined
Jun 26, 2007
Messages
710
I'm looking to upgrade from my current e4300 but I don't want to have to replace my P965 motherboard due to the WGA issues it would probably cause. Where are prices on the current 65nm CPU's going in the near future, specifically the Q6600 and the E6850? Also, at current/near term prices, which of these is the better value?
 
There's a post, literally within 1-2 posts of this one atm, asking the exact same question. It even comes with answers.

I know this because it's mine. It can be found here: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1318579

I also know that it may be hard to use the search function, but...is it really that hard to at least scan the first 10 topics on a forum before making a new post? I mean...ultimately you would have saved yourself the time and effort of posting, so it kind of benefits you too.

~S
 
semisonic9 said:
There's a post, literally within 1-2 posts of this one atm, asking the exact same question. It even comes with answers.

I know this because it's mine. It can be found here: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1318579

I also know that it may be hard to use the search function, but...is it really that hard to at least scan the first 10 topics on a forum before making a new post? I mean...ultimately you would have saved yourself the time and effort of posting, so it kind of benefits you too.

~S
Click to expand...
Funny how you think it's asking the exact same question because I already read that post and it said absolutely nothing about the E6850, nor did any of the responses, nor did any of the linked articles.
 
From that thread:

Bio-Hazard said:
Latest I've read...................;)

The Core 2 Quad Q9300 and Q6700 will both be phased out at the same time too, leaving the Q6600 as the only 65nm quad-core CPU left in Intel's lineup, and which will drop from US$224 to US$203.

For dual-core CPUs, Intel will launch the Core 2 Duo E8600 at 3.33GHz and US$266, and will phase out the Core 2 Duo E8300. The company will also drop pricing for the Core 2 Duo E8500 and E8400 from US$266 and US$183 to US$183 and US$163, respectively.

Intel will also add the Core 2 Duo E7300 at 2.66GHz and US$133 to its entry-level line and to drop the price of its Core 2 Duo E7200 from US$133 to US$113.

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20080520PD205.html
Click to expand...

Everything bolded has to do with the 65nm chips in one way, either as a replacement (ie, they're phasing them out. duh.) or a price-change (in the case of the q6600).

You were wrong to post without even looking at the forum, and you're wrong to waste time trying to "prove" otherwise.

I'm done wasting time on you. Stop being a jackass and you'll stop getting posts that hurt your feelings.

~S
 
semisonic9 said:
From that thread:



Everything bolded has to do with the 65nm chips in one way, either as a replacement (ie, they're phasing them out. duh.) or a price-change (in the case of the q6600).

You were wrong to post without even looking at the forum, and you're wrong to waste time trying to "prove" otherwise.

I'm done wasting time on you. Stop being a jackass and you'll stop getting posts that hurt your feelings.

~S
Click to expand...
Whatever floats your boat young man............:D

As for hurting my feeling, give it your best shot, children can't and will never be able to hurt my feelings.................:eek:
 
I don't think he was talking to you Biohazard...either that or my sarcasm meter broke. O_O

On topic: doesn't matter if the E6850 wasn't mentioned, it was EOLed already. You should be looking at the E8400.
 
Yeah back on topic:

Itchyeyes, do you have the Rev 3.3 or Rev 1.3 of the DS3? If so, Gigabyte released a BIOs update for those DS3 revisions to support the new 45nm CPUs. The only 65nm CPU worth getting now or in the future for you is the Q6600.
 
Sadly Rev 1.3. Anyone have any idea how much longer they'll be selling the Q6600 for?
 
Itchyeyes said:
Sadly Rev 1.3. Anyone have any idea how much longer they'll be selling the Q6600 for?
Click to expand...

Odd. Rev 1.3 is no longer listed on the Gigabyte website.....

The Q6600 should still be selling for another 6 months or so after it has reached EOL. No word yet on when the Q6600 will reach EOL. Though probably when the mainstream Nehalem CPUs are released.
 
I would get the e8400 over the q6600.

Higer clocks > more cores IMO
 
stain. said:
I would get the e8400 over the q6600.

Higer clocks > more cores IMO
Click to expand...

The *only* importance of higher clocks is with VERY poorly-coded games, such as Crysis, as most other software takes NO advantage of higher clockings (even above 3.00 GHz), as they are, for the most part, GPU-limited. In short, CPU frequency, is, by and large, irrelevant. (To think otherwise is sheer -e-penis envy, IMOHO.)
 
PGHammer said:
The *only* importance of higher clocks is with VERY poorly-coded games, such as Crysis, as most other software takes NO advantage of higher clockings (even above 3.00 GHz), as they are, for the most part, GPU-limited. In short, CPU frequency, is, by and large, irrelevant. (To think otherwise is sheer -e-penis envy, IMOHO.)
Click to expand...

Some games (RTS's, other sims, etc) are more CPU than GPU limited, and can benefit from higher clocks.
 
Danny Bui said:
Odd. Rev 1.3 is no longer listed on the Gigabyte website.....

The Q6600 should still be selling for another 6 months or so after it has reached EOL. No word yet on when the Q6600 will reach EOL. Though probably when the mainstream Nehalem CPUs are released.
Click to expand...

Here's the CPU support page.




Itchyeyes:

As far as Q3 prices go: from VR-Zone

http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/Intel_Upcoming_Desktop_CPU_Price_Cut/5787.html

If this roadmap holds true, you'll find the Q6600 will be priced at $203. This is a $21 price drop, though you could find the same price or lower today. I'm not sure if or how much retailers will drop the price next month since they may have priced it in already.

The Q3 price cuts usually come some time in July.

Anyway, get the Q6600 or Q6700.
 
turumbar said:
Some games (RTS's, other sims, etc) are more CPU than GPU limited, and can benefit from higher clocks.
Click to expand...


That may be true of sims (specifically FSX), but it certainly isn't true of most RTSes (definitely untrue of GalCiv II or the expansions, SupCom or the expansions, or even Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War or its expansions). About the only RTSes it *is* true of were coded in the bad old days of the Netburst architecture when developers thought CPU clocking would ramp up forever (and among those, it's still untrue of C&C Generals/ZH, as it's simply incapable of being dialed up but so far, as even my Northwood-C has it banging on the ceiling at 1600x1200 with the rig in my sig below).
 
harpoon said:
Clockspeed is important for Age of Conan as well:
http://au.gamespot.com/features/6192732/p-6.html

There are only a few games (Sup Com and FSX off the top of my head) where a lower clocked quad will outperform a higher clocked dual core. In 99% of cases an E8400 is better than a Q6600 for gaming purposes.
Click to expand...

Not at speeds higher than 3 GHz, and certainly not if you multitask. If you are *single-tasking*, then even a single-core processor will do (Celeron). However, when it comes down to it, how many people run *only* that game on their computer? Do you have an AV program running in the background? Some other security program (anti-malware, anti-spyware, etc.)? IM software? Webcam? Graphics card tools (RivaTuner/ATITool/CCC)?

If you answered yes to ANY of the above, then even a dual-core CPU may not be enough for you to maximize your game performance, for the simple reason that even micro-applets such as these do sap energy from one of the two available cores. If you are finding youself killing applets to run a game, then you have severely miscalculated your CPU budget.
 
harpoon said:
Clockspeed is important for Age of Conan as well:
http://au.gamespot.com/features/6192732/p-6.html

There are only a few games (Sup Com and FSX off the top of my head) where a lower clocked quad will outperform a higher clocked dual core. In 99% of cases an E8400 is better than a Q6600 for gaming purposes.
Click to expand...

Not at speeds higher than 3 GHz, and certainly not if you multitask. If you are *single-tasking*, then even a single-core processor will do (Celeron). However, when it comes down to it, how many people run *only* that game on their computer? Do you have an AV program running in the background? Some other security program (anti-malware, anti-spyware, etc.)? IM software? Webcam? Graphics card tools (RivaTuner/ATITool/CCC)?

If you answered yes to ANY of the above, then even a dual-core CPU may not be enough for you to maximize your game performance, for the simple reason that even micro-applets such as these do sap energy from one of the two available cores. If you are finding youself killing applets to run a game, then you have severely miscalculated your CPU budget.
 
PGHammer said:
That may be true of sims (specifically FSX), but it certainly isn't true of most RTSes (definitely untrue of GalCiv II or the expansions, SupCom or the expansions, or even Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War or its expansions). About the only RTSes it *is* true of were coded in the bad old days of the Netburst architecture when developers thought CPU clocking would ramp up forever (and among those, it's still untrue of C&C Generals/ZH, as it's simply incapable of being dialed up but so far, as even my Northwood-C has it banging on the ceiling at 1600x1200 with the rig in my sig below).
Click to expand...

you're wrong about supcom.
 
Q6700 seems to be nice with 10x multiplier, and if they drop it low enough maybe i'll grab one of those. Does somebody have experience with this chip, does it overclock well, does it need crazy voltage increase in order to get decent overclock, 3.4 - 3.6... ?
 
GibsonEX said:
Q6700 seems to be nice with 10x multiplier, and if they drop it low enough maybe i'll grab one of those. Does somebody have experience with this chip, does it overclock well, does it need crazy voltage increase in order to get decent overclock, 3.4 - 3.6... ?
Click to expand...

The Q6700 overclocks about the same as the Q6600. Hit up the C2D Overclocking Database stickied here in the Intel subforum to see the kind of OC the Q6600 can hit.
 
Were we to also understand that the Q9450 was being discontinued and the Q9550 would be substituted at the same price-point as the current Q9450? That had been spoken about for "3rd quarter" activity, correct?

Or, was this to occur at a different date?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top