E6850 or Q6600?

[Bubbabigsexy]

I am planning on buying one of these two processors. I will be playing graphic intensive games and lots of downloading. I have a 8800 GTS 512. Which one should I purchase? The Q6600 is about $20 less. The Q6700 is around $570, which is more than I want to pay. I had planned on buying the E6850, but I am not sure if it is faster than the Q6600, even though it gets 3.0 GHz to the Q6600's 2.4 GHz. Any suggestions?

 

[Bigfellla]

Q6600 is the best bang/buck known to man after the 8800GT. The sing together. Plus get the G0 stepping and you overclock to 3.6Ghz on standard HSF> nice.

 

[captaincranky]

Depends on the phase of the moon......

A tricked out C2D 6850 might out benchmark the Q6600 for gaming. I wouldn't even think about a Q6700, that's (IMHO) throwing money away.

One of our members put down a Quad Extreme for a C2D (not sure which one) he was using it to game.

 

[Rage_3K_Moiz]

The E6850 OC'd will give better performance than the Q6600 at similar frequencies, but the extra cores of the Q6600 are what makes it worth the price.

 

[maxbb1]

The E6850 OC'd will give better performance than the Q6600 at similar frequencies, but the extra cores of the Q6600 are what makes it worth the price.

clock for clock the Q6600 wins. proved in benchmarks. the 8mb L2 cache does that over the dual cores 4mb.

the overclocking potential is also very similar (at least 3.6 usually on the Q6600... similar, maybe a touch higher on the E6850, but not enough to make the lack of 2 cores and 4mb of cache worth it.)

factor in the 2 extra cores and you have a clear winner.

twice the cores. twice the cache. clock for clock victory and similar overclocking frequency capabilities. for a similar, if not lesser price in a lot of cases.

 

[Fragrant Coit]

I can vouch for the Q6600 - it goes like buggery! 38 sec 2M SuperPi @ 3.26GHz

Mine runs at 3.26GHz, and it's the RAM that's failing at faster speeds {I don't have many dividers in the BIOS} I'm saving for some 1066MHz RAM & am gonna push harder.

 

[AlbertLionheart]

E6600 - best bang for your buck. And the trade thinks so too.
But as is always the case, it depends what you want to use it for. I have an E6400 and this does all the general office apps that I use (not a gamer), is sharp and there is negligable delay in opening any of the apps I use.

 

[Rage_3K_Moiz]

****e, the "OC'd" shouldn't have been there. At stock frequencies the E6850 is a much better performer. But OCing is a different picture altogether. Since the OP didn't specify whether he'd be willing to OC or not, I just decided to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[captaincranky]

Hmmm....

E6600 - best bang for your buck. And the trade thinks so too.
But as is always the case, it depends what you want to use it for. I have an E6400 and this does all the general office apps that I use (not a gamer), is sharp and there is negligable delay in opening any of the apps I use.

The E6600 is now (by and large) a retrofit part. The 6X50 series are intended for 1333FSB boards. So, depending on what's the plan for a mobo here yes, the E6600 is worth taking a look at. However, the Q6600 also will work in the older boards (1066FSB). Again, as you say, it goes back to the applications you're going to use for the final decision.

 

[Myzz617]

Go for the E6750 if your going to buy a C2D processor.