• 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.

We need a Q6600 upgrade flowchart....

A

AMDXP

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
2,631
Something like...

Q6600 At Stock? Upgrade!

Q6600 at 3.4-3.6+? Don't Upgrade.

Have spare money you want to spend? Upgrade!


You guys feel me?
 
I have a Q6600 currently at 2.7.. I had it at 3.2 for a long time but toned it down a bit after repeated crashing while (I posted a thread but never really got any help.. ). Still, I think right now I'm better off waiting 8-12 months, and going all new. I would like an upgrade but unfortunately... but before that (and building a new rig ..), I need a job.

Actually, I dont quite know why I'm even posting, it's like saying... I should upgrade, but I don't have money, so I won't. I think the biggest thing I could do is get back to 3.0 or 3.2 stable. I didn't try 375x8 for 3.0, I ought to at least try that I suppose (I cant do 333x9, I'm told that's a common problem with 680i mobos).
 
If you have Q6600 hitting 3,2+ definitly don't upgrade to anything AMD currently offers you will only be disappointed.
 
Michaelius said:
If you have Q6600 hitting 3,2+ definitly don't upgrade to anything AMD currently offers you will only be disappointed.
Click to expand...


you couldn't be further from the truth on that statement


The q6600 @ 3.2GHz is good for a little less than 31 GFLOPS

you can pull those numbers off with AMD Phenom II X3 and Phenom II x2's (unlocked to x3)

hell a Phenom II x4 @ 3.2GHz would do around 40 GFLOPS

I have not found any hard numbers on what a Athlon II x4 can do @ 3.2GHz (I would like to know how bad the lack of L3 cache effects it)

if these numbers are correct then it is pretty darn close (but they seem inflated to me for having no L3)
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/tdrussellncsu/currentoc.jpg
 
EricFX1984 said:
you couldn't be further from the truth on that statement


The q6600 @ 3.2GHz is good for a little less than 31 GFLOPS

you can pull those numbers off with AMD Phenom II X3 and Phenom II x2's (unlocked to x3)

hell a Phenom II x4 @ 3.2GHz would do around 40 GFLOPS

I have not found any hard numbers on what a Athlon II x4 can do @ 3.2GHz (I would like to know how bad the lack of L3 cache effects it)

if these numbers are correct then it is pretty darn close (but they seem inflated to me for having no L3)
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/tdrussellncsu/currentoc.jpg
Click to expand...

GFLOPS eh? How does it compare to real benchmarks? A Q6600 clock for clock would absolutly destory X2's and X3's in ACTUAL application performance.

The sooner you realize GFLOPS is nothing more than a usless static benchmark measurment, quoted by people who don't know any better, the better off you'll be.
 
A Phenom II X4 at 3.2 GHz(say the 965) will be roughly equal(depends on the benchmark) with a Q6600.....the Phenom II architecture is even with the Core 2 series architecture
 
EricFX1984 said:
you couldn't be further from the truth on that statement


The q6600 @ 3.2GHz is good for a little less than 31 GFLOPS

you can pull those numbers off with AMD Phenom II X3 and Phenom II x2's (unlocked to x3)

hell a Phenom II x4 @ 3.2GHz would do around 40 GFLOPS

I have not found any hard numbers on what a Athlon II x4 can do @ 3.2GHz (I would like to know how bad the lack of L3 cache effects it)

if these numbers are correct then it is pretty darn close (but they seem inflated to me for having no L3)
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/tdrussellncsu/currentoc.jpg
Click to expand...

Listen dude i had Q6600@3,3 and have now Phenom II X6 which i bough after all those reviews stating how awesome it is in 6 threaded aps.

That's bullshit 4 threaded performance in games show no noticable real life gains over q6600 while 6 threaded BOINC results vary from being much slower to much faster than similarly clocked i7.

Considering you sacrafice 1,2,3,4 threaded performance, pay with higher energy consumption that's very disappointing compared to upgrading to i7.
 
RamonGTP said:
GFLOPS eh? How does it compare to real benchmarks? A Q6600 clock for clock would absolutly destory X2's and X3's in ACTUAL application performance.

The sooner you realize GFLOPS is nothing more than a usless static benchmark measurment, quoted by people who don't know any better, the better off you'll be.
Click to expand...

horse poop buddy, a GFLOP is a measure of a cpu's abilities that is much more raw that many other bench marks...

it certainly is not the deciding factor... and many games do tend to be setup more in Intel's favor...

I can tell you from having both a q6600 sitting here on my desk and a pII 965 that clock for clock my pII 965 is wasting my q6600

however that being said... the i7 would kill them both... in the right situations

the point is that any CPU can do better than the other... in the right scenario...
 
EricFX1984 said:
horse poop buddy, a GFLOP is a measure of a cpu's abilities that is much more raw that many other bench marks...

it certainly is not the deciding factor... and many games do tend to be setup more in Intel's favor...

I can tell you from having both a q6600 sitting here on my desk and a pII 965 that clock for clock my pII 965 is wasting my q6600

however that being said... the i7 would kill them both... in the right situations

the point is that any CPU can do better than the other... in the right scenario...
Click to expand...

The right scenario being what? A useless Sandra CPU benchmark? I know what a gflop is, I also know it means nothing on it's own. Go ahead and keep quoting GFLOPS and see how many people take you seriously.
 
I'm in ther same boat right now. I have the cash to do a mobo/cpu/ram upgrade but I'm afraid I won't see a significant boost. I do a lot of encoding but most of the time I do it via a handbrake queue and let it run overnight while I sleep. I decided to wait for intels new socket and grab an obsidian 800d and an ssd for now.
 
EricFX1984 said:
horse poop buddy, a GFLOP is a measure of a cpu's abilities that is much more raw that many other bench marks...
Click to expand...
And it's also completely useless for getting any sort of idea about how a CPU performs when you actually use it for real-world tasks. Most people don't sit at their PCs running GFLOPS measurement programs all day long. Hence why benchmarks are actually helpful; they reflect the performance of different CPUs while performing tasks that people actually do.
 
Michaelius said:
Listen dude i had Q6600@3,3 and have now Phenom II X6 which i bough after all those reviews stating how awesome it is in 6 threaded aps.

That's bullshit 4 threaded performance in games show no noticable real life gains over q6600 while 6 threaded BOINC results vary from being much slower to much faster than similarly clocked i7.

Considering you sacrafice 1,2,3,4 threaded performance, pay with higher energy consumption that's very disappointing compared to upgrading to i7.
Click to expand...

link to the results with boinc?
 
ps

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/hosts_user.php?userid=532062

my inoue rig is a amd 945 at 3ghz. the hueco mundo is a q9450 at stock. inoue does about 5700 max what i've seen so far, and hueco mundo about 6k. the gpu is doing work too but thats not too bad for the amd. i can't wait to try the 955 and 965 amds i bought to run seti on boinc :). i'm getting boards i can put 1090T's into when they are cheaper. well worth the bang for the buck as far as seti goes
 
matrix563 said:
link to the results with boinc?
Click to expand...

http://aqua.dwavesys.com/result.php?resultid=4395155

I hope it's visible but in case it's not:

aqua@home, X6@14x265, Vista 64 bit
Run time 29,955.40
CPU time 160,988.90
13919 pts working around to more or less 40k per day.

Same project for I7 @3,5 is around 45k according to my teammates.

The other project we do is Prime Grid - X6 was faster during summer challange- 6 tasks every 3,2 hours vs 8 tasks every 5,5.

Now if every task i do showed X6>i7 i'd consider it good machine but since it's also my gaming computer it's tradeoff that definitly wasn't worth it.

The only redemption for amd i can see is 32 nm bulldozer working on the same mobo (and i hope they will bring 6 module/12 threaded version into am3 too)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top