• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Looking for a 'future proof' upgrade (2-3 years)

D

Dulak

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
316
CPU/MB and ram

Running a 4800+ 1.5 gigs of ram and a asus a8r-mvp mb

I need to upgrade

I've been eyeing the q6600, I've heard people talk about the 8400 also ... but I like to mutitask like crazy; nothing fancy for graphics programs but I do like to play games and do other things at the same time.

So would you go with 6600? if so which mb?
is this a good one DFI LanParty Dark DK P35-T2RS
or would you recommend something else?
as far as heatsink is concerned any suggestions for a cheap one or use retail?
and mem ... what speed and brand

thanks
 
Really can't go wrong with either one - if you are a heavy multitasker, you might be better off with the Q6600 - great processor for the price.

I haven't tried this generation of DFI boards, but they are pretty solid. Really, any of the P35 boards are going to work out just fine for you - I'm really happy with my Gigabyte, but others are likewise happy with their Asus or Abit or whatever.

Definately get an aftermarket cooler for either processor - the Xigmatek is a good knockoff of the TRUE if you don't want to spring for the real deal.

With the Q6600 any good DDR2-800 is going to give you a max overclock - if you go with the E8400 you might want to upgrade to DDR2-1000 so you can run 1:1 at the higher FSBs you can reach with that chip.
 
There's no guarantee that in a year or less Nehalem won't come out, it won't be so earth shattering crazy good that we all have to upgrade, and your (and my) quad won't prove more or less useless. There's no such thing as futureproof.

The Xigmatech isn't a TRUE knockoff -- you just have to look at the base of the thing to see that.

Brand matters very little with RAM -- Corsair, Crucial, A-Data, G.Skill, Geil, Mushkin, OCZ, PQI, TEAM Group. Any DDR2-800 CAS5 or lower will be all you need with a Q6600. With an E8400 DDR2-1000 is more ideal.

Since your goals are long-term staying power and multitasking ability a quad is the clear choice . The only real choice for you at this point is Q6600, Q9300, or Q9450.
 
A quad-core does sound like the best option if you're hoping to use it for a while and you multitask a lot, yes.

Nehalem might be the most fantastic thing in the world, but it won't suddenly make all existing CPUs bad, and software won't instantly start requiring Nehalem to run properly. I'm sure lots of enthusiasts will upgrade to Nehalem because it's the new best thing, but if you're happy with your performance then there's nothing pushing you to upgrade. That's especially true for CPUs, where only in a limited number of applications is a faster CPU actually worth a significant real-world improvement.
 
For future proofing I would go this route and be done with it, but have a kick ass system for years to come that won't break the bank.

Motherboard = Intel IP45 chipset, should be out next month, has PCIeX 2.0 support, DDR2 support, the newest Intel cpu support, and the IP35 has a track record of being rock solid stable, so should this IP45

Memory = DDR2-6400, you can get like 4gb of Corsair for under $100, sweet deal go for it.

CPU = depends on your budget but do NOT get a Q6600 now, because the 45nm cpu's run cooler and better, spend the money on a 45nm cpu instead if you plan to keep for years. I say the Q9450 hands down is the best geek cpu right now, for a little over $300.


So add it all up and you have to spend maybe $600.00 for all three parts but this is really nice high end stuff that will last a long time to come and be rock solid stable.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813127030
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145194
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115042
 
q6600 would be the best bet for a budget quad, if you can spend more get a q9450.
 
good luk your never really future proff, every 6 months something better comes out! also socket 775 is at it's end so you may want to wait before upgrading.
 
Zorachus said:
CPU = depends on your budget but do NOT get a Q6600 now, because the 45nm cpu's run cooler and better, spend the money on a 45nm cpu instead if you plan to keep for years. I say the Q9450 hands down is the best geek cpu right now, for a little over $300.
Click to expand...

Hardly. The Q6600 performs on par with the Q9xxx series, maybe 10-15% slower clock for clock in cherry-picked circumstances. $100+ more (1/2 again the original price, and possible then some) for a 10% increase in performance seems like a /very/ poor decision to me.

Also, talk to anyone who actually owns one of the 45nm quads -- they don't OC much better because they can't take the voltage a 65nm can, and they don't run that much cooler, either. With a sufficient HSF the Q6600 will reach 3.4-3.6Ghz with relative ease, assuming you don't just get a horrible chip.
 
I would not buy a Q6600 because of the power requirements, it uses more wattage and runs hotter than the 45nm cpu's. You may laugh at me, but people should really start concerning themselves with energy efficiency, it is important to start doing that, if everybody said fuck it who cares that is how the world gets screwed up. It is all a mindset that should be applied to all parts of your life, like you car, your home, etc...
 
Zorachus said:
I would not buy a Q6600 because of the power requirements, it uses more wattage and runs hotter than the 45nm cpu's. You may laugh at me, but people should really start concerning themselves with energy efficiency, it is important to start doing that, if everybody said fuck it who cares that is how the world gets screwed up. It is all a mindset that should be applied to all parts of your life, like you car, your home, etc...
Click to expand...

It's ~15 watts different. That's one harddrive, or ~3 fans. It would be different if it were a 25% or a 50% difference, but again, it's more like 10%. Hardly anything to get worried over.
 
silent-circuit said:
It's ~15 watts different. That's one harddrive, or ~3 fans. It would be different if it were a 25% or a 50% difference, but again, it's more like 10%. Hardly anything to get worried over.
Click to expand...

Differences that small will often get chewed up if you overclock the 45nm parts beyond 3 GHz (with or without aftermarket air-cooling). If you stay at 3 GHz or less (which the Q6600 will reach with the bone-stock HSF included with the retail package), the 45nm quads no longer have any price-performance advantage (and you can actually make up the energy efficiency with a solid 80-plus-rated PSU, such as the PCP&C Silencer 750Quad or Turbo-Cool 850).
 
most "future proof" is kind of an oxymoron in computer terms. B/c nothing is even close to future proof with the rate of technology in the computer industry.

I'd agree a quad core would probably be the most future resiliant.

You didn't really say your price range.

You want something really "future proof" get this motherboard:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121330 and 2 quads! ;)

Trying to make upgrades last 3 years is kind of dumb in a way.
People want to spend more money now to make something last longer. But what happens is you just have a slow computer after about 1/2 way through that 3 years. You do better buying a cheaper system now, then upgrading it in approx. 18 months.

Case in point. Someone who bought a "fancy" computer 3 years ago would have been buying something like a Pentium D XE 840 @ 3.2Ghz with ddr2 and pcie, and if they trying maxing it out so it would last longer and waiting 3 years they'd have slow as computer now. But if they bought something cheaper then they wouldn't mind doing a cheap upgrade later like anytime last year or so, where they could just get a new mobo & cpu and be in business, like a cheap Core2duo e4x00/e6xx0 and cheap 965/P35 mobo.
 
Zorachus said:
I would not buy a Q6600 because of the power requirements, it uses more wattage and runs hotter than the 45nm cpu's. You may laugh at me, but people should really start concerning themselves with energy efficiency, it is important to start doing that, if everybody said fuck it who cares that is how the world gets screwed up. It is all a mindset that should be applied to all parts of your life, like you car, your home, etc...
Click to expand...

every time you fire up your PC to do something useless like play a game or surf the intarwebs your making CO2 for no good reason.
 
you can get a 6700 oem for around $260. sometimes on sale for $240 (tiger direct). you cant get a guaranteed g0 stepping q6600 for less than that. as of last week, newegg was still shipping b3, and the only retaill q6600 at mwave are b3 (sl9um). the quad goes well with a p35 board, or if you might want to go with a multiple vid card solution in the future (instead of a cpu/mb/ram upgrade) cnsider one of the x38 boards or the evga 780i. if you want to get as close to the future as possible without "wait until nehalem yadda yadda" type crap get an x38/48 or 790i board with ddr3. it will run an extra couple hundred but might be worth it if you are going to hold on to it for a couple/few years. dfi makes great boards.
 
DDR3 with the current generation is a waste as it offers zero performance gain.

By the time DDR3 is mature, with lower latency and higher clocks actually making it a better choice than DDR2, it will be required by the Nehalem platform.

Nehalem will require a new motherboard, as it requires a different socket.

A $600 DDR3 kit today will likely lose out to a $200 kit of DDR3 in a year or two. A $80 kit of DDR2-800 today will perform just as well as the $600 kit of DDR3. You're throwing away $300 going with DDR3 now, and your $600 kit will be considered weak once it's actually important.

Thusly, any LGA775 DDR3 motherboard is a bad buy, and DDR3 in general right now is a bad buy..
 
chrisf6969 said:
most "future proof" is kind of an oxymoron in computer terms. B/c nothing is even close to future proof with the rate of technology in the computer industry.

I'd agree a quad core would probably be the most future resiliant.

You didn't really say your price range.

You want something really "future proof" get this motherboard:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121330 and 2 quads! ;)

Trying to make upgrades last 3 years is kind of dumb in a way.
People want to spend more money now to make something last longer. But what happens is you just have a slow computer after about 1/2 way through that 3 years. You do better buying a cheaper system now, then upgrading it in approx. 18 months.

Case in point. Someone who bought a "fancy" computer 3 years ago would have been buying something like a Pentium D XE 840 @ 3.2Ghz with ddr2 and pcie, and if they trying maxing it out so it would last longer and waiting 3 years they'd have slow as computer now. But if they bought something cheaper then they wouldn't mind doing a cheap upgrade later like anytime last year or so, where they could just get a new mobo & cpu and be in business, like a cheap Core2duo e4x00/e6xx0 and cheap 965/P35 mobo.
Click to expand...

I call bullshit on that. You can get a "future proof" computer. I got my P965 motherboard back in August 06 and am still running that motherboard. I got my Q6600 right when they came out in Jan 07. I also maxed it out to 8gb when Vista came out. So I am running a 22 month old motherboard with a 18 month old CPU and 17 month old ram. So your saying my system is slow and needs to be updated?? This system should last me for at least 2-3 more years after this. We haven't even started to really touch what quad core CPUs can do. If you properly plan and time your upgrades you can easily get a computer that will be more than fast enough to last 3 years without a problem.
 
I think the suggestion isn't that you can't build a machine that will last you several years, but rather that "future proof" suggests it will always be good, whereas "future resistant" means that you can hold off for a while but you'll need to upgrade again some time whatever you do - which is the case (unless you have very low demands).

It's actually been rather quiet lately on the hardware front, with the 45nm Core 2s being an improvement but not a quantum leap, and there being almost no improvement on the graphics front. Both of these are likely to change this year. But as I said above, the fact that new stuff comes out doesn't mean that you're duty-bound to buy it the second it's released; I don't anticipate replacing this machine during the Nehalem era. I'm aiming for more like Sandy Bridge.
 
I got the e6300 when it first came out and it's still a good cpu for what I use it for, wont need to replace that computer for another 5 years or so.
 
philbrown23 said:
good luk your never really future proff, every 6 months something better comes out! also socket 775 is at it's end so you may want to wait before upgrading.
Click to expand...

He didn't say he wanted a system that will be top of the line for 2-3 years, he wanted a system that would last that long without a "need" to upgrade, which is very possible.
 
RamonGTP said:
He didn't say he wanted a system that will be top of the line for 2-3 years, he wanted a system that would last that long without a "need" to upgrade, which is very possible.
Click to expand...


Just do it already, because there is always something around the corner with that thinking you would never upgrade and wait forever. Now waiting is good if you know a brand new next generation product is due out in like a few weeks, sure that is smart waiting then, but otherwise just pull the trigger.

Like VideoCards, do NOT buy a new one right now, wait until the week June 16th when both nVidia and AMD release their brand new products. Other than that everything you can buy today won't change much until 2009.
 
brom42 said:
I call bullshit on that. You can get a "future proof" computer. I got my P965 motherboard back in August 06 and am still running that motherboard. I got my Q6600 right when they came out in Jan 07. I also maxed it out to 8gb when Vista came out. So I am running a 22 month old motherboard with a 18 month old CPU and 17 month old ram. So your saying my system is slow and needs to be updated?? This system should last me for at least 2-3 more years after this. We haven't even started to really touch what quad core CPUs can do. If you properly plan and time your upgrades you can easily get a computer that will be more than fast enough to last 3 years without a problem.
Click to expand...

You just called BS on yourself. Why aren't you using a 3 year old system right now? B/c its slow to a current processor, like a Core2Duo or Quad.

If you had a 3 year old system then you could call shens on my idea.

But you took your 2 year old system, you've already upgraded then CPU once, and added more ram. You don't know whats going to be out in 2 years.

Remember some of the famous quotes of all time like I think it was Bill Gates that said all you'll ever need is 64Kb of memory!! lol

Technically you could be using a 3-5 year old system still right now, but the problem is, it would be SLOW compared to what a current system will do. Especially if you upgraded to the Vista on that 3-5 year old box.

Windows 7 will be out in approx. 2 years. It might be a huge memory hog, look at how Vista changed the ram & videocard requirements landscape.

Anyway, you DON'T know what is going to happen in 2 years.

3 years ago, people were saying 1Gb is all you need. But now a lot of people are getting 4Gb for their high end systems b/c Vista 64-bit can use it.

I do think that hardware has been moving faster than software the past few years. So most people have more power than they need. But you don't know what the next generation of internet apps or video, etc.. will bring.

I'm also not saying that your computer won't handle the apps, but it may handle them much slower than then current generation of processors in 2+ years. (like a Nehalem 8 core system!)
 
Three year old system right now...
X2 4800+ and a 7800 GTX, right?

[edit]
Actually I think the X2's would just be out and the 7800 GTX comes out this fall. That's three years ago.

Well the X2 holds up but I dunno about the 7800.
Haha.
 
chrisf6969 said:
You just called BS on yourself. Why aren't you using a 3 year old system right now? B/c its slow to a current processor, like a Core2Duo or Quad.

If you had a 3 year old system then you could call shens on my idea.

But you took your 2 year old system, you've already upgraded then CPU once, and added more ram. You don't know whats going to be out in 2 years.

Remember some of the famous quotes of all time like I think it was Bill Gates that said all you'll ever need is 64Kb of memory!! lol

Technically you could be using a 3-5 year old system still right now, but the problem is, it would be SLOW compared to what a current system will do. Especially if you upgraded to the Vista on that 3-5 year old box.

Windows 7 will be out in approx. 2 years. It might be a huge memory hog, look at how Vista changed the ram & videocard requirements landscape.

Anyway, you DON'T know what is going to happen in 2 years.

3 years ago, people were saying 1Gb is all you need. But now a lot of people are getting 4Gb for their high end systems b/c Vista 64-bit can use it.

I do think that hardware has been moving faster than software the past few years. So most people have more power than they need. But you don't know what the next generation of internet apps or video, etc.. will bring.

I'm also not saying that your computer won't handle the apps, but it may handle them much slower than then current generation of processors in 2+ years. (like a Nehalem 8 core system!)
Click to expand...

Well, you can look ahead and see what will be there in 2+ years. Google "windows 7 requirements." Windows 7 is going to be based on the windows vista kernel and will probably have the same basic hardware requirements as Vista. In other words if you build a system now that is able to run Vista well, then you are ready for Windows 7. So if you add the probably expected life span of Windows 7 (if it doesn't get pushed back :rolleyes:) then you should be able to easily use the computer until 2013 without any problems.

I also am running a 3+ year old system at work. It has one of the first Pentium D CPUs in it. Sure if I run benchmarks on it, my current system blows it away; but for 90%+ of daily things there is absolutely no noticeable difference between the 2 systems.

Unless you do really heavy duty CPU intensive tasks on a regular basis, any decent system will last you 3+ year. We have multi-core CPUs to thank for that. I bet that if the OP just upgrades his mobo, CPU and ram from is current system, the vast majority of the time he will have difficulty telling the difference. (Other than in benchmarks) If he put new fast HDDs and a new GPU in his current system he would probably get more of a boost than with a new CPU/Mobo.
 
brom42 said:
I call bullshit on that. You can get a "future proof" computer. I got my P965 motherboard back in August 06 and am still running that motherboard. I got my Q6600 right when they came out in Jan 07. I also maxed it out to 8gb when Vista came out. So I am running a 22 month old motherboard with a 18 month old CPU and 17 month old ram. So your saying my system is slow and needs to be updated?? This system should last me for at least 2-3 more years after this. We haven't even started to really touch what quad core CPUs can do. If you properly plan and time your upgrades you can easily get a computer that will be more than fast enough to last 3 years without a problem.
Click to expand...

that's why buying a q6600 system is a waste and its better to buy a nehalem mobo as that will last you 2 years solid at least.
 
jonneymendoza said:
that's why buying a q6600 system is a waste and its better to buy a nehalem mobo as that will last you 2 years solid at least.
Click to expand...

The Q6600 is as fast as the dual where it matters, and faster in multithreaded apps, for the same price. It also allows you to reach the maximum reasonable overclock with less expensive RAM. That, and it costs about the same. How is it a waste again?
 
What exactly are we debating about again? lol

My point was just that there is no such thing as future proof. I think anyone will tell you that.

A 3 year old (high end) system whether it be a Pentium D or 4800+ and Geforce 7800, etc... would be getting a LITTLE long in the tooth right now. He says he games and is a heavy multitasker. So it would be good for him to stay more cutting edge with cheaper incremental upgrades as games need the latest hardware to run best.

So I was just telling him don't go all out on something too expensive trying to make it last forever, when you can do cheaper incremental upgrades and keep your system faster and more up to date.

Almost everyone has upgraded in the past 2 years because of Core2's awesomeness. And if Nehalem is the next big awesome "TICK" upgrade like its supposed to be. I think he may get buyers remorse, and won't have the money left over for another upgrade.

So my point is he might just want to get by cheap for now, something that will last him 18 months instead of 3 years.

1. He saves money now that he can use later on the incremental upgrade.
2. he won't take as big of a hit when selling his "old" hardware. Cheap stuff 18 months old doesn't lose as much of its value; as high end stuff like extreme edition, etc. thats 3 years old. High end stuff just depreciates SO FAST

Though he wasn't really looking at high end stuff per se. a q6600 or e8400 are mainstream performance I guess. But he might do better just getting an e2160/2180 and OC'd it to last him until Nehalems are reasonaly priced.
 
u cant do much incremental upgrades on a 775 socket board. when nehalem comes out it will require a new socket
 
cheap mobo & cpu now.
then nehalem mobo & cpu later (in like 18 months, when its mainstream)
or cheap quad 45nm later.
 
Just get an E series 45nm proc. Its cheaper runs games faster at stock. And when you need more power will overclock well.

I just did an upgrade myself from a 4800+ and the e8500 hasn't disappointed me in the least. tabbing out of games is no sweat and I don't even really plan to OC it yet until I run up on something that needs it. Cuz even at stock its fast.
 
Zorachus said:
I would not buy a Q6600 because of the power requirements, it uses more wattage and runs hotter than the 45nm cpu's. You may laugh at me, but people should really start concerning themselves with energy efficiency, it is important to start doing that, if everybody said fuck it who cares that is how the world gets screwed up. It is all a mindset that should be applied to all parts of your life, like you car, your home, etc...
Click to expand...

oh lord :rolleyes: if you really want to do something good for the environment, get the Q6600 for US$100 less, and donate that US$100 to an appropriate lobbying organization. it'll make a much bigger difference there than it will in Intel's coffers. but i suppose it makes an epeen look that much bigger and prettier to spend $100 more and "do something good for the environment" :eek:

oh, and to the OP, +1 for the Q6600. you say you need to upgrade now, and it's the best thing to have, now. don't blow your budget, and that way, in another 18 months when nahelem has (hopefully) matured and dropped a bit in price, you can upgrade again if you really need to (though, you might not need to: it really remains to be seen).
 
when alan wake comes out it will tax out a quad core easily. dual core is a waste if you want your system to last more than 6months.
 
UtopiA said:
Three year old system right now...
X2 4800+ and a 7800 GTX, right?

[edit]
Actually I think the X2's would just be out and the 7800 GTX comes out this fall. That's three years ago.

Well the X2 holds up but I dunno about the 7800.
Haha.
Click to expand...


Definitely. I still run an X2, and it is perfect for pretty much anything I have to do. Processors don't need to be upgraded often, at this point in time, in my opinion. Video cards, however, could benefit from more frequent upgrades (if you're a heavy gamer).
 
Nehalem will be out this year (most probably - it's what Intel says) but I doubt the enthusiast parts will be affordable this year. There are several rumors that Bloomfield will be the "extreme edition" consumer chip with triple channel DDR3, and that this will be the only overclockable chip. Don't know if this is true, or how much faster the lesser dual channel parts will be (especially at stock) compared to 45nm quads like the q9450.
This is very similar to the initial situation with the 45nm quads where it was launched as promised before the end of the year but only the extreme edition parts were available.

As for future-proofing - if you buy a q6600 or q9450 and overclock, you should have something close to top of the line (as far as what you could buy retail) until the end of this year. After that I expect Nehalem to have broader availability in Q1 or possibly Q2 2009, after which reasonably priced enthusiast parts in the $250-$350 range should start becoming available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top