Duo E6850 or Quad 6600 (1 Viewer)

[sting24]

Im about to but a new computer and there are 2 main options for the processor. The duo e6850 3ghz or the quad 6600 2.4ghz. I know there has been a lot of debate around these two chips, but i think im going for the E6850 only because right now quad core cant really be utilised by games (except for a few) and the duo core is 25% faster. Even tho ive heard overclocked the quad may do better, i am not really interested in overclocking, so i think the E6850 would be best. Any comments??

 

[Disposable]

I would buy the dual core E6850, as you said there isnt many games etc that can utilise quad and you will find the E6850 a very powerful chip.

As far as overclocking goes, you would need to put a non-stock heatsink and put alot of effort into cooling to get much out of it, which adds higher price to the quad and lowers the lifespan of the chip considerably. But from what ive seen from my 6400 which is overclock from 2.19Ghz up to 3.1Ghz the core2duos overclock fairly well no matter which you get.

 

[Excalibur_]

Quads will always have lower overclocking headroom than Duals.

Why? Because more cores = more heat.

Unless you're doing anything with Adobe CS3 (or other similar video/photo manipulation activities), 3D rendering, major BOINC'ing or have plans for extreme multitasking, I'd go with the dual.

Quads are only good if you're doing those activities (I was shocked when a 2000x2000 PSD -> JPEG conversion was done in 1s!)

 

[Tojara]

Quads are better then dual cores if your going to overclock it. Read the reviews an E6850 Overclocked to 3.8Ghz gets beaten by a Q6600 overclocked to 3.4Ghz in games... etc.. everything.

Q6600 is the best bang for buck at the moment.

 

[Excalibur_]

Quads are better then dual cores if your going to overclock it. Read the reviews an E6850 Overclocked to 3.8Ghz gets beaten by a Q6600 overclocked to 3.4Ghz in games... etc.. everything.

Q6600 is the best bang for buck at the moment.

Cite your source.

Last time I checked, single threaded applications can only be run on one CPU because you cannot arbitarily divide threads effectively. Most software on the market right now is single threaded.

I don't see how a 2.8GHz cannot beat a 2.4GHz processor with exactly the same architecture.

 

[Tojara]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2quad-q6600_8.html#sect0


Spend alot of time here and you shall learn alot -

http://forums.overclockers.com.au/forumdisplay.php?f=21

 

[shinji]

Quad - Futureproof.

@Excalibur: not true. they're bringing out the Penryn quad processors which have a smaller core. smaller core = less heat = more ocing potential.

get the Q9450.

 

[Excalibur_]

OP isn't interested in OCing...

 

[shinji]

So why did u refer to Duals having more ocing headroom than quads...
?

 

[lpfreak]

Depending on what you use your comp mainly for, and when your next upgrade will be.

If you do a lot of multitasking (not gaming)-go for the Q6600
If you tend to do a lot of gaming- go for the E6850

 

[sanjeevprasad99]

quad

 

[TrickmA]

If you don't plan to over-clock then the E6850 is potentially the better buy, it will run everything faster then the quad besides those few multi core compatible games/programs (of which there is a huge lack of atm).

Unless you are a 3D renderer or something along those lines, or just intend on playing Supreme commander lol.

But on the other hand if you are over-clocking, the Q6600 is definitely the better buy as it has a larger cache and will outperform the Dual as you push it higher.

You also need to consider how soon afterwards you plan on upgrading? It is possible that in 2 years time the majority of programs will utilise 4 cores and you will be left in the dark just like single core users are at the moment.

So Quad is definitely future proof.

I myself am upgrading my rig next week and I've purchased a Q6600, planning to overclock it to around 3ghz (same speed as E6850 but 2 more cores+extra cache )