• 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 vs E6850

E

EyceMann

n00b
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
17
I am fixing to order my new CPU here in the next couple of days, Should I go with the Q6600 or the E6850. I will be gaming some, plus pretty much everyday use of the PC with nothing too extreme. I want one that will be good for 2 years or better. What do you guys suggest?
 
If you are keeping it for awhile, go for the Q6600. In the long run it will run circles around the E6850 when more multithreaded apps become available.

Plus you won't see any real world difference right now.
 
Go for the Q6600 at MicroCenter for 199, but i think the deal is end today.
 
There was a review on Xbitlabs with the Q6600 vs the E6850. The Q6600 will be more future proof and will also benefit more if you do overclock. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2quad-q6600.html Also, the prices on the E6850 aren't that good as compared to the Q6600. Pointless to get the Dual Core E6850 when you can get a 45nm Dual Core E8400 at the same clock speed. If... you can get a hold of a E8400. Right now, the Q6600 is the way to go.
 
i ditched my e8400 for a slacr q6600 that does 3.0 on air, at stock volts, and idles at 32c.

nope, it isn't as fast as the 8400, but honestly, i do more video encoding and rendering than
ultra high speed gaming. so the q6600 suits me JUST fine. ubuntu just LOVES the extra cores.

the 6850 would be a dissapointment i think.
 
This was a no brainer for me. I like to fold, and game, but previously folding + gaming meant my work units slowed WAY down, to the point that on a good gaming weekend I would lose a work unit because the time ran out. With the Q6600, I don't have that issue anymore.

I also run virtual machines for web servers and such, so it never hurts to have extra cores when you are gaming, folding and running VM's.
 
The E6850 was a bad choice before the E8400 release. With the release of the E8400, the E6850 is shitty choice.

Go for the Q6600. It's only $30 more than what current E8400 CPUs retail for and has better long-term usage. Meaning that that more apps in the future will take advantage of quad-cores.
 
Can anyone tell me how the Quad will perform for Music Production?
 
Can anyone tell me how the Quad will perform for Music Production?
Click to expand...

First you need to find out if your software is multi processor aware. Check with the software vendor.

If not, you will not get much gain at all from Quad core system right now.

Does your music production involve alot of processor intensive filtering and what not? Do you tell it to do something, and then come back in 10 or 20 minutes when it is done?

OP, go with the Q6600.

Don
 
Danny Bui said:
The E6850 was a bad choice before the E8400 release. With the release of the E8400, the E6850 is shitty choice.

Go for the Q6600. It's only $30 more than what current E8400 CPUs retail for and has better long-term usage. Meaning that that more apps in the future will take advantage of quad-cores.
Click to expand...

I agree with Danny. And the reason the E6850 was a bad choice before the E8400 came out was because the E6750 was around $100 cheaper, and only 333Mhz slower. If you were OC'ing, they had the same OC potential, too, so there really was no point to buy the E6850 before.

If you can find a microcenter with E8400's in stock, they'll be $190.
 
I'm looking to upgrade my gaming rig, so basically gaming only, still recommend the Q6600 over the E6850?
 
SiRCYRO said:
I'm looking to upgrade my gaming rig, so basically gaming only, still recommend the Q6600 over the E6850?
Click to expand...

Yes, because future games will start taking advantage of more cores. Also, you can OC the Q6600 quite nicely. If you plan on upgrading the CPU anytime within the next year or so to a quadcore, then you can go for the E8400. Don't even consider the E6850.
 
Q6600 or E6750 > E6850

I eventually chose a E6750 because i wanted the higher Bus (1333mhz vs 1066, which i overclocked to 1600 hence i now went from 2.66ghz from the e6750 to 3.2ghz, which slaps the e6850 out of the water.) I also do a lot of music production (reason/cubase/reaper) i opted for the 2 core with faster bus over the quad core but it was indeed a hard decision. No regrets tho (as everyone says quad core is more future proof but in the future your prolly going to 8 or 16 or 32 ect cores anyways)
 
My Q6600 OC'd to 3.6Ghz seems faster than my E6750 OC'd to 3.8Ghz. This is just my personal experience.
 
SiRCYRO said:
I'm looking to upgrade my gaming rig, so basically gaming only, still recommend the Q6600 over the E6850?
Click to expand...

Gaming? Then Q6600 is overkill, though I hear Supreme commander likes many cores.
Get the E8400, not the e6850. it's 3Ghz but the former is cheaper.

Q6600 generates more heat and uses more power, plus it's hard to overclock (as compared to dual cores, air cooling).

edit: just saw that you got the e6750. Congrats. welcome to the club! You can get up to 3.6 with proper cooling and a bit more volts.
 
Just re-itterating what the majority of the posters are saying.. Q6600 FTW. I have never been able to achieve a 500 FSB with my QX6700 but this G0 Q6600 is plenty fast enough on the FSB.. (and this is a simple overclock on my little mATX board)!


500FSB1.jpg
 
I am going with the Q6600 as well; it seems that xbitlabs gave a pretty fair/balanced pov of the two.

As well, in due time...Multi-threaded apps will definitely start popping up, and you will need a processor that can introduce you to them...

Until then...I don't know...The differences are almost identical.
 
chrispycrunch said:
edit: just saw that you got the e6750. Congrats. welcome to the club! You can get up to 3.6 with proper cooling and a bit more volts.
Click to expand...

You should easily reach 3.6Ghz... 4Ghz should also be possible, with more tweaking and good cooling. I can POST at 4Ghz, 1.6v, but its not stable in windows. Orthos crashes within seconds. I know cooling isn't my issue though, because even at 1.6v, and during the 2 seconds of ORTHOS, it only reaches 62°C. :( I think I just didn't get lucky enough with my chip and its 1.35v VID.

officermartinez said:
Just re-itterating what the majority of the posters are saying.. Q6600 FTW. I have never been able to achieve a 500 FSB with my QX6700 but this G0 Q6600 is plenty fast enough on the FSB.. (and this is a simple overclock on my little mATX board)!
Click to expand...

Wow... nice OC on that board! Tempts me to get that board, but I'll hold out for the G45 boards... should be out in a few weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top