• 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.

Q6600 or Q9400?

R

rjolin01

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
1,399
Just want some opinions on which processor to use as my main gaming rig.
A Q6600 (G0) or a Q9400 (ES)
I have watercooling of the cpu only and my motherboard is a eVga 750i FTW. I plan on doing some playing around with overclocking, but I am not the most experienced. I know that the Q6600 has higher multiplier but the Q9400 has higher FSB.
 
stevedave said:
Q6600 will be faster after overclock.
Click to expand...
Not only that; the Q6600 G0s are known to be very good for overclocking. And you get more cache. However, due to 45nm processing, the Q9400 might overclock even better. If it were a Q9450, I'd say go with that but in this case? With watercooling, I'd stick to the Q6600 and overclock the hell out of it ;)
 
The Q9400 is a better chip. Aside from a small cache deficiency, it's faster clock for clock compared to the Q6600, has SSE4.1, and will overclock better while using less power.
 
I am starting to think that these two chips are basiclly the same in pros and cons....where one lacks the other doesnt. I guess its just more which I want to play with.
 
Don't ya just hate it when you answer your own question? What are the prices for the 2 cpus? I have a Q6600 @ 3.3. Not having much luck getting higher.

I'm considering a Q9550 because I'd like to get to 3.8 - 4.0. If you live near a Microcenter, they have the Q9550 on sale for $159. Just a thought.
 
rjolin01 said:
I am starting to think that these two chips are basiclly the same in pros and cons....where one lacks the other doesnt. I guess its just more which I want to play with.
Click to expand...
The only "pro" that the Q6600 has is slightly more cache, which will make no difference in most situations. The Q9400 is a better CPU in every other aspect. It performs better clock for clock, overclocks better, has SSE4.1, and is more power-efficient.
 
Zero82z said:
The only "pro" that the Q6600 has is slightly more cache, which will make no difference in most situations. The Q9400 is a better CPU in every other aspect. It performs better clock for clock, overclocks better, has SSE4.1, and is more power-efficient.
Click to expand...

Q6600 has 9x multi while Q9400 is 8x which can be a factor if hes going for a heavy OC.
 
the Q6600 could also have better compatibility for the 750 board, I know mine does but I have a asus not evga.
 
well i have gotten the Q6600 up to 3.6 on my watercooled set up but my brother has gotten the Q9400 up to 3.89 on air. So I am thinking maybe I should try the Q9400 on my watercooled setup and see if I can get 4-4.2. If this is the case I am sure the lower cache would not be factor. Am I correct in assuming this? Like I said before I am no ocing pro.
 
rjolin01 said:
Am I correct in assuming this?
Click to expand...
The lower cache most likely won't be a factor even if the Q9400 is running at the same speed as the Q6600. Like I explained twice already, the Q9400 has other advantages that make up for its deficiency in that aspect.
 
It will be a little tuff to get 4.0 on a q9400....like you said, you arent a oc pro.
 
thanks everyone for your input. i think i am going to go with the Q9400 as my main rig and Q6600 as secondary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top