4400+ (939) to Q6600: Much improvement?

imExcitebike

imExcitebike

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Messages
1,067
Right now I'm running:

DFI LanParty SLI-DR
AMD X2 4400+
2Gb Corsair DDR400
512 8800GT

I'm looking to replace the mobo, cpu, and ram with

Asus P5Q Pro
Q6600
4Gb G.Skill

I'll be keeping my 8800gt right now as I don't have it in my budget to upgrade it.

With all this considered, what a somewhat large increase in performance be expected?

I'm mainly playing WoW (wotlk beta performance is sucking) Warhammer, and CoD4, but plan on getting D3 and SC2 when they come out.

Thoughts?
 
I'd imagine a gigantic performance increase, especially for wotlk. The Q6600 is awesome and I went from a 5000+ X2 on an Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe to an E8400 on a P5Q Pro and am loving the upgrade. I have an 8600GTS though, so your performance should definitely destroy mine XD

I do play WoW and CoD4 and can verify that from a 5000+ it made a gigantic difference.
 
Q6600 will blow your current rig away.

I went from an Opty 175 running at 2.75Ghz to a Q6600. Even with the Q6600 at a stock 2.4Ghz, it was no contest.
 
I went from a 2GHz Opteron 170 (bad overclocker) to a Q6600. It was like going from a Yugo to a Lamborghini. And that's just stock. Overclocking the Q6600 gave me the fastest machine I have yet owned (see sig).
 
i'm on almost same setup .. but x2 4200+ instead...

the Q6600 seems interesting though...
 
I went from a P4 2.6GHz to a Q6600 2.4GHz (stock) and the difference in general computing was... Honestly not that much different. Probably like .5 seconds difference when opening a website or Photoshop pretty much. I'd actually say around 30% noticeable difference for general computer stuff, but for gaming the new processor+new video card definitely rocked. From a 4400 to Q6600 I'd say you'll gain a good 10FPS across the board if not more, especially in something like Supreme Commander if you even play that.

The beta performance should only be sucking because of the coding and optimizations. The game is not adding in some ridiculous graphics or anything hehe. My buddy w/ an E6600 @ 3.0GHz w/ 8800GT runs it absolutely smooth as butter except for a few certain places. Maybe it is the CPU but I've never seen that game run bad on anything above a P4 3.0+
 
I made the exact same upgrade and I am very happy with it. I had a 939 X2 4400+ @ 2.6GHz and it just wasn't cutting it anymore. HUGE improvement in just about everything. I say go for it.
 
Thats good to hear. Im planing upgrading my X2 400 and X2 4800 to a Qxxx or an E8xxx. I just need to work the xxxs out now.
 
try underclocking about 400mhz and see if wow feels slower. if it does then its a cpu issue. I tried vanilla wow at 1.5ghz on my 939 and could barely tell! other newer non mmo games it will help though.
 
I went from a Athlon 64 3000+ Winchester to a Q6600. The difference is much more than immense. The sad part is that I paid nearly the same price for both.
 
world of warcraft sees a huge performance increase from CPU's. you would definitely be happy with the upgrade.
 
Wow, I was about to ask the EXACT same question! Glad to hear it's a noticeable improvement.

BTW, will the Q6600 still be a good choice if I don't plan on building my new rig until closer to xmas? I'd hate to upgrade only to see a new CPU or worse yet, new socket design come out a couple weeks after I build my new rig. That kind of pissed me off when I first got my Socket 939, less than a month later, Socket AM2 came out and I was instantly obsolete.
 
There will be a new design AND a new socket around that time... Nehalem, AKA Core i7
 
I went from a 4200 X2 (939) to a E8400, and I was shocked by the performance boost I got.
 
Yeah, if the Nehalams are too expensive or I can't find a mATX board, im gonna pick up a Q9300 or Q9400.
 
Speaking of Nehalem mbs, when will there be more of them besides the X58?
 
Upgrading from a 4400+ X2 to an E8400 was like upgrading my single core A64 3000+ to the 4400+ (huge). There's no reason not to make a similar upgrade since 4400+ X2's go for $150 or more on ebay.

2gb -> 4gb in Vista 64-bit is a hell of an upgrade as well.
 
I made nearly the same move - I went 4400X2->Opteron 185->Q6600->Q9650. The only place in that progression I noticed any difference was from Opteron 185->Q6600 - and it was a HUGE difference. I went from 32bit Vista to 64bit at the same time. 4GB the whole way.
 
I moved from Intel Pentium 4 530 to Core 2 Quad 6600, and it was brilliant. The awesome performance is everywhere to taste. You will never regret for upgrading to Q6600.
 
Jakalwarrior said:
try underclocking about 400mhz and see if wow feels slower. if it does then its a cpu issue. I tried vanilla wow at 1.5ghz on my 939 and could barely tell! other newer non mmo games it will help though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, when I was on my A64 3000+ I did this, went from 1.8 to 2.4 and back and forth and couldn't really tell.

Thing is, I never tested in raids or where the real slowdowns happen. I moved to an x2 and the performance upgrade was quite noticeable. The places where performance was good, I didn't notice, but then we went to SSC and Hyjal and I was amazed at how much better the x2 was than the single core at the same speed.

Now contemplating going either C2D at 3GHz-ish or a C2Q at 2.5GHz-ish. Hard to make a call whether it's better to go faster or more cores, but based on previous experience with WoW, for the games I'll likely be playing (WoW, maybe WHammer, DiabloIII when it comes) I'm thinking more cores is going to be better.
 
Well I went from the A64 3000+ in my sig to the Q6600 in my sig and it was a pretty huge difference in WoW and Source games. I believe the majority of that wow factor was the 8800gt comparing to the old ati 9600 pro
 
Ok, So im contemplating going with the e8500 instead of the q6600. They are about the same price, but I think I can push the e8500 high OCing wise.

Still a good idea?
 
imExcitebike said:
Ok, So im contemplating going with the e8500 instead of the q6600. They are about the same price, but I think I can push the e8500 high OCing wise.

Still a good idea?
Click to expand...

Depends on what your usage will be. Heavy multitasking, take the slower quad (but still overclock). If you're mainly gaming, take the dual and overclock it higher.
 
Sovereign said:
Depends on what your usage will be. Heavy multitasking, take the slower quad (but still overclock). If you're mainly gaming, take the dual and overclock it higher.
Click to expand...

I'll only really be gaming on this machine. I'll be using my laptop for surfing, music, and stuff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top