LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI decided to make the jump expecting there to be a difference between the E6600 + X1900XT and the Q6600 and 8800GT but what I didn't expect was how much of a difference
In 3DMark06 I went from 5063 points to 11488points! more than double!
I decided to make the jump expecting there to be a difference between the E6600 + X1900XT and the Q6600 and 8800GT but what I didn't expect was how much of a difference
In 3DMark06 I went from 5063 points to 11488points! more than double!
□ΞVΞ□
Ahhhh but do you notice a difference?
lol
in CS:S, not really no.
□ΞVΞ□
are they overclocked?
no need for a quad if you don't actually need 4 cores.
Depends what you use your PC for.
If you ever find yourself wanting to encode some video and play a game at the same time the 4 cores are invaluable.
I do video editing and rendering. I haven't OC the Q6600 but the 8800GT is factory OCd
□ΞVΞ□
3Dmark06 is heavily cpu dependent. My opty 146@3ghz, 2gb PC4000 (250Mhz) ram, 8800GTS 512mb gets 8000 (plus a bit more when gfx is overclocked). If I switched to the lowest C2D chip I would certainly increase this score by a fair margin, probably 2000 points even though the cpu would be @1.8ghz.
I try to shy away from 3Dmark because it's a catch all benchmark whereby individual needs are not tested and it becomes a tool for willy waving. I see it more as a tool for benching stability quickly and showing up glaring issues than anything else. It's much better to benchmark applications that you are going to use and then use those benchmarks to decide whether you are happy with your current hardware or not.
eg. My PC's highest load is during gaming and therefore FPS along with image quality is my main concern. With the new card I have bioshock running at a minimum of 45+ frames per second and an average of high 50s on a 60Hz monitor.
And that's fine and dandy, I don't suffer any issues in gaming (not tried crysis yet). however, if I wanted to start doing alot more multi tasking or decoding that could take advantage of a dual/quad core processor then I would be at a distinct disadvantage in REAL WORLD performance for the given applications. I'm now starting to find this happening more and more hence the planned upgrade in the new year. And I'll still struggle over the dual/quad decision.
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
The GPU upgrade would be a good move.
The move from your E6600 to the quad wouldnt really make alot of difference for you if you are gaming (especially with CS:S).
Stick with the E6600
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
SCAN.care@HEXUS
SCAN.care@HEXUS
SCAN.care@HEXUS
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote