Q6600 or Q9300

[Rastalovich]

Not 1 for 1, but the series respectively I guess.

Q6600 for much cheapness imo atm.

Q9xxx for the environmentalist with a wallet ?

 

[kataras]

Tbh only by seeing how much cheaper Q6600 is, and seeing that its got 2MB more chache as well as higher multi 9 instead of 7.5, id go for Q6600. Overclocks of Q9300 arent that great, because of the multi and a need of high end motherboard. Now if you asked Q9450 or Q6600 then and only then it would be a question of life

 

[Bungral]

Or for the same price as the 9300 you could have the 6700 and not worry about killing the world.

 

[Rastalovich]

Not so sure the 6700 is as readily available anymore.

I would also assume with my questioning that Q9xxxx would include the Q9450. The whole thing really is Q6600 ~£100-£120, £70++ more for a newer gen. To what end performance wize ?

If u don`t care about watt usage, the Q6600 is viable.

 

[Bungral]

Not so sure the 6700 is as readily available anymore.

I would also assume with my questioning that Q9xxxx would include the Q9450. The whole thing really is Q6600 ~£100-£120, £70++ more for a newer gen. To what end performance wize ?

If u don`t care about watt usage, the Q6600 is viable.

My Q6700 turned up today... Still widely available and after it got halved in price I wanted to give it a go... Multi of 10 Mmmmmm

 

[Rastalovich]

Ah u right, I just looked again $279 atm. x10 indeed, worth a sniff.

 

[Bungral]

Ah u right, I just looked again $279 atm. x10 indeed, worth a sniff.

Yup... I was gonna try and get it out in the States last week but as the etailers wouldn't deliver to a hotel it kinda limited my choices. Frys didn't stock it and even if they did, the price wouldn't have been that much better than over here online.

 

[Rastalovich]

Finding some Q9450 over here @ Scan for £235 w/game..

 

[CERO]

Definately go for the Q6600, for a several obvious reasons

1) Higher multiplier

2) bigger cache

3) because of the higher multiplier u wont be hitting a wall that fast if u got

high OC expectations.

4). Cheaper? well at least here in the Netherlands they are 30-40 euros cheaper...

the only advantage what I can think of the Q9300 over the Q6600 is the fact the is 45nm and thus runs cooler, but nothing that a proper cooling cant do so go for the Q6600!

 

[!TIMMY!]

I also asked this question to myself and opted to get the q6600 for all the reasons above.

 

[MikeEnIke]

Ah u right, I just looked again $279 atm. x10 indeed, worth a sniff.

I'd go with the Q6700, they just seem to be generally better for multiple needs and great for overclocking, not to mention proven reliability.

 

[Bungral]

I'd go with the Q6700, they just seem to be generally better for multiple needs and great for overclocking, not to mention proven reliability.

Mine seems ok even with its high VID

Booted in at 4GHz, but was a mile away from stable.

Stable at 3.6GHz but my ram wont run at its stock speeds with the CPU at that frequency. Having to bring them down to 1066 to get it Prime stable. Also eating up quite a bit of voltage to hold it there.

Anyway... My point is that even with possibly one of the cackest VID's the chip is still pretty damn good. Get lucky enough to get a lower one and you should be able to clock high to the sky without too much voltage.