quad core question

[myktek]

so the q6600 and qx6700 are really not quad core they split the 1066 bus by 4, so wouldn't that hurt it severely..wouldn't a dual core running at 533 fsb be better?

and what is the difference between the quad's besides the clocks. I compared them on newegg and everything is the same besides the clock speed and warranty.

 

[Cannydog]

The primary difference between the two are that the QX6700 is not multiplier limited. And the Q6600 is "multiplier limited", meaning you can lower the multiplier but not raise it. To Overclock you raise the Front Side Bus speeds. Which also increases memory speeds, all other settings being equal. This is what most overclockers do anyway. As that boosts memory performance and that in turn benefits CPU performance. (Truth be told most C2D overclocks they drop the multiplier so they can get significantly higher FSB speeds.

As for your first question: I was of the understanding that the 1066 speed was the DDR rate of 533. The two designations are the "same speed". As for whether, these CPUs are "true Quad Core", no technically they aren't. They are really 2 Dual Cores on the same die. But still there are advantages to the way Intel chose to do it. For one, you don't have to buy a special motherboard, and I'd say that you won't find much software that will expose the weaknesses of this setup atm (later, say like late 2008 - 2009, that may begin to change). Conversely, at present, most software doesn't even fully use multi-threading techniques, so some of the cores might be under-utilized.