Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 32

Thread: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    I apologise in advance if this question has been asked 1000x times, but i'm a new user who intends to upgrade his PC in the next few days and i've been getting differing opinions on which way I should go.

    My girlfriend and I mostly use the PC for gaming, mainly World of Warcraft, Sims and soon Spore. I know WoW only uses 2 cores of any processor right now. Can anyone advise on which option would be best? (We won't be considering overclocking)

  2. #2
    Ultra-Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Monton, Greater Manchester
    Posts
    250
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    9 times in 9 posts
    • sjbuck's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit X38 Quad GT with watercooled VRMs
      • CPU:
      • E6600 @ 3.6Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 4GB Corsair 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • RAID0 - 2x OCZ Solids, 1 x 74GB Raptor, 2x2x400GB Samsung, 1.5TB Synology 207+
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX GTX295 :)
      • PSU:
      • Hyper 880W PSU,(Was 480Watt Tagan (Powering ALL this!))
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Full Case with 'Loft cooled' External Koolance Exos 2 Water Cooling
      • Operating System:
      • XP/V64/2008
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 30"
      • Internet:
      • Be 24Mbps (15Mbps/2Mbps in reality)

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Q6600, will easily run alost anything that only support 2 cores, plus you have another 2 for other tasks or other games that DO use 4 cores. I'd consider overclocking it though, for the sake for 2 mins of your time in the BIOS to change a couple of settings (literally) you can be running at an easy 3-3.2Ghz.

    Hope that helps. Enjoy

    Steve

  3. #3
    finding nemo staffsMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,498
    Thanks
    197
    Thanked
    794 times in 741 posts
    • staffsMike's system
      • Motherboard:
      • evga 680i
      • CPU:
      • e6600
      • Memory:
      • geil ultra pc6400
      • Storage:
      • WD 320gb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • leadtek 8800 GTS 640mb
      • PSU:
      • ocz gameXstream 700w
      • Case:
      • akasa eclipse
      • Monitor(s):
      • dell 2007wfp and Lg L194WT
      • Internet:
      • pipex homecall

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    If it's just for gaming the E8400 is fine. Q6600's won't improve games right now or in the very near future but they will eventually mature into the chip of choice.

    Gaming isn't really bottle necked by the CPU above 2.2Ghz on a dual core, it's mainly down to the graphics card anyway. With that in mind you may wish to opt for the cheaper E7200 (2.5GHz). If you do change your mind on overclocking this chip will easily hit 3.5GHz.

    Quad core will allow you to run cpu intensive tasks in the background of games but if you don't need that sort of functionality then stick with dual but you might as well go with the cheaper dual imo.

    If it really is between just the E8400 and Q6600 I'd go with the Q6600 given it won't bottleneck your games anyway and has that element of future proofed power.

  4. #4
    Keep it sexy Zhaoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    1,263
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked
    89 times in 81 posts
    • Zhaoman's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASRock P45-R2000 Wifi
      • CPU:
      • Core 2 Q6600 2.4Ghz (400Mhz FSB)
      • Memory:
      • 4Gb Corsair XMS 800Mhz
      • Storage:
      • 640Gb WD Caviar AAKS
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire HD4850 dual-slot
      • PSU:
      • Be Quiet 550W (black beauty!)
      • Case:
      • Gigabyte Aurora 3D
      • Operating System:
      • Vista 64 Home Premium
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 10Mb

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    The Q6600 has a bottleneck in the 266Mhz FSB especially as it's a quad core. The 333Mhz FSB of the E8400 (along with its higher clock) will outpace the Q6600 easily in pretty much everything apart from video encoding. Be aware though that the Q6600 will hit 333Mhz FSB and a 3Ghz clock with just 2 mins in the BIOS (as mentioned above). This would largely negate the advantages of the E8400 but it would suck a lot more power.

    On the basis that you won't be overclocking, the E8400 is by far the better buy on stock speeds. If you do intend to overclock a little bit, then the Q6600 is better as it can reach the same speeds while offering 2 more cores.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Betty_Swallocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Feet up, spliff lit.
    Posts
    1,139
    Thanks
    70
    Thanked
    60 times in 44 posts
    • Betty_Swallocks's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z97-A
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5 4690K o/c to 4.6 gHz
      • Memory:
      • 8Gb DDR3
      • Storage:
      • 256Gb SSD + 1320Gb (3x SATA drives)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI R9 390 8Gb
      • PSU:
      • Corsair CS750M
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake Shark
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 37" Samsung TV @1920x1080 + Dell 20.1" TFT secondary screen
      • Internet:
      • 150Mb Virgin Media cable

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    The E8400 is faster than the Q6600 in most real world situations.

    If you exclusively run programs like 3d Studio Max or if you're running a server operating system then the quad core is a little bit faster, but hardly anything takes advantage of all four cores nor is likely to in the lifetime of an enthusiasts cpu.

    2 cores running at 3Ghz is faster than 2 cores running at 2.4Ghz. End of story. Look at the CPU charts at Tom's Hardware. The Q6600 is a bit ahead in rendering, but not by a lot, and the E8400 absolutely wipes the floor with the quad core in games and most other applications. The Winrar test for example. E8400: 145 seconds Q6600: 171 seconds

    I'm ordering my upgrade on Monday and I considered the Q6600 until I looked at the performance differnnce. I'm getting the E8500 which is almost identical in price to the Q6600 but is faster in the Quake 4 benchmark in the chart than the Q9650 which currently retails at over 600 quid.

    As games is mostly where I notice performance (or lack of it) it makes sense to me to buy the chip which is best for games.

    The dual core is also good for overclocking. I've heard of E8400s hitting 4Ghz without too much trouble
    "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having."

  6. #6
    SSK
    SSK is offline
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    126
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • SSK's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5N-E SLI
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Core Q6600
      • Memory:
      • 4GB
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 500GB SpinPoint
      • Graphics card(s):
      • BFG 8800GT 512mb OC2
      • PSU:
      • OCZ GameXstream 700W
      • Case:
      • Sharkoon Rebel 9
      • Monitor(s):
      • 22" LG Flatron Wide MonitorTV HD Ready

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    if you dont fancy overclocking at all (tho you should ) then the e8400 is the one to go for

    if you upto overclocking then go for the q6600 as it will overclock 3.0ghz+ and will be future proof for many years to come

  7. #7
    Lover & Fighter Blitzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Between Your Mum & Sister
    Posts
    6,310
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked
    382 times in 300 posts
    • Blitzen's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ABIT iX38 QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz : 30 Degrees Idle - 41-46 Degrees Load
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400 @ 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints - RAID 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 285
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU 82+ 625W
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic Q22wb 22" Widescreen - 5ms
      • Internet:
      • O2 premium @ 17mb

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhaoman View Post
    The Q6600 has a bottleneck in the 266Mhz FSB especially as it's a quad core. The 333Mhz FSB of the E8400 (along with its higher clock) will outpace the Q6600 easily in pretty much everything apart from video encoding. Be aware though that the Q6600 will hit 333Mhz FSB and a 3Ghz clock with just 2 mins in the BIOS (as mentioned above). This would largely negate the advantages of the E8400 but it would suck a lot more power.

    On the basis that you won't be overclocking, the E8400 is by far the better buy on stock speeds. If you do intend to overclock a little bit, then the Q6600 is better as it can reach the same speeds while offering 2 more cores.

    You make it sound like the Q6600 gets slaughtered by the E8400.
    Clock for clock, price per pound.
    The Q6600 wins out.

    (i vowed not to post here again but i couldnt help it )

  8. #8
    Senior Member Mithrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,746
    Thanks
    461
    Thanked
    370 times in 188 posts
    • Mithrandir's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Biostar TP45-HP
      • CPU:
      • C2D e4600 (w/ Xigmatek Red Scorpion)
      • Memory:
      • OCZ ReaperX (2x2gb)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung F1 500gb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition
      • PSU:
      • Xigmatek NRP-MC651
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster Cavalier 3 silver (windowed)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Fujitsu Siemens SCALEOVIEW D22W-1

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Not overclocking = E8400

    Overclocking = Q6600
    Cavalier-X: Biostar TP45-HP ¦ E4600@3.1ghz - Xigmatek Red Scorpion (OCZ Freeze) ¦ OCZ ReaperX 2x2gb (792mhz @ 4-4-4--12) ¦ Xigmatek NRP-MC651 ¦
    Palit 8800gt ¦ X-fi Fatal1ty Gamer ¦ Coolermaster Cavalier 3 (Silver/Windowed) ¦

    Poseidon Magma: MSI P45 Zilent ¦ E6300@3.0ghz - Coolermaster Hyper 212 (MX-2) ¦ Corsair 2x2gb (880mhz @ 5-5-5-15) ¦ Corsair HX450w ¦
    xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition (780/1950/1000) ¦ X-fi Gamer ¦ Gigabyte Poseiden ¦

  9. #9
    Senior Member Betty_Swallocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Feet up, spliff lit.
    Posts
    1,139
    Thanks
    70
    Thanked
    60 times in 44 posts
    • Betty_Swallocks's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z97-A
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5 4690K o/c to 4.6 gHz
      • Memory:
      • 8Gb DDR3
      • Storage:
      • 256Gb SSD + 1320Gb (3x SATA drives)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI R9 390 8Gb
      • PSU:
      • Corsair CS750M
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake Shark
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 37" Samsung TV @1920x1080 + Dell 20.1" TFT secondary screen
      • Internet:
      • 150Mb Virgin Media cable

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    How so? For a start the Q6600 is £10 more expensive than the E8400 and if you look at any of the real world benchmarks apart from 3d rendering the dual core is faster. In the Photoshop benchmark the dual core is 22 seconds faster. There will presumeably come a time when all the applications we use four cores but they don't yet. A dual core running at 3Ghz (and capable of being overclocked to about 4) is going to be faster than half a quad core running at 2.4 (and clockable to about 3.6 I understand)
    "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having."

  10. #10
    Senior Member Mithrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,746
    Thanks
    461
    Thanked
    370 times in 188 posts
    • Mithrandir's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Biostar TP45-HP
      • CPU:
      • C2D e4600 (w/ Xigmatek Red Scorpion)
      • Memory:
      • OCZ ReaperX (2x2gb)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung F1 500gb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition
      • PSU:
      • Xigmatek NRP-MC651
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster Cavalier 3 silver (windowed)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Fujitsu Siemens SCALEOVIEW D22W-1

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Having thought about it, I think the e8400 would be a much better choice.

    Core speed: e8400 is 3ghz vs e6600 2.4ghz (e8400 better)
    Bus speed: e8400 1333Mhz vs q6600 1066Mhz (e8400 better)
    Cache: e8400 3mb per core vs q6600 2mb per core (I think e8400 is better)
    Manufacturing process: e8400 65w vs q6600 95W (e8400 better)
    Approximate OC: e8400 ~4ghz vs q6600 ~3.6ghz (e8400 better)
    Price: Similar

    Cavalier-X: Biostar TP45-HP ¦ E4600@3.1ghz - Xigmatek Red Scorpion (OCZ Freeze) ¦ OCZ ReaperX 2x2gb (792mhz @ 4-4-4--12) ¦ Xigmatek NRP-MC651 ¦
    Palit 8800gt ¦ X-fi Fatal1ty Gamer ¦ Coolermaster Cavalier 3 (Silver/Windowed) ¦

    Poseidon Magma: MSI P45 Zilent ¦ E6300@3.0ghz - Coolermaster Hyper 212 (MX-2) ¦ Corsair 2x2gb (880mhz @ 5-5-5-15) ¦ Corsair HX450w ¦
    xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition (780/1950/1000) ¦ X-fi Gamer ¦ Gigabyte Poseiden ¦

  11. #11
    finding nemo staffsMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,498
    Thanks
    197
    Thanked
    794 times in 741 posts
    • staffsMike's system
      • Motherboard:
      • evga 680i
      • CPU:
      • e6600
      • Memory:
      • geil ultra pc6400
      • Storage:
      • WD 320gb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • leadtek 8800 GTS 640mb
      • PSU:
      • ocz gameXstream 700w
      • Case:
      • akasa eclipse
      • Monitor(s):
      • dell 2007wfp and Lg L194WT
      • Internet:
      • pipex homecall

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    It's not really as simple as that though is it.

    Look at the figures for real word apps. Very little difference but if all 4 cores can be used the e8400 is left for dead.

    Still I think a cheaper dual would suit this situation.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Sorry to jump in on this thread but I've spent hours choosing between these two processors and was told by my local shop to go for the Quad as I mostly use my PC for music and video editing.

    Anyway I've just purchased the Q6600, hope I made the right choice.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Mithrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,746
    Thanks
    461
    Thanked
    370 times in 188 posts
    • Mithrandir's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Biostar TP45-HP
      • CPU:
      • C2D e4600 (w/ Xigmatek Red Scorpion)
      • Memory:
      • OCZ ReaperX (2x2gb)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung F1 500gb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition
      • PSU:
      • Xigmatek NRP-MC651
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster Cavalier 3 silver (windowed)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Fujitsu Siemens SCALEOVIEW D22W-1

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Quote Originally Posted by staffsMike View Post
    It's not really as simple as that though is it.

    Look at the figures for real word apps. Very little difference but if all 4 cores can be used the e8400 is left for dead.

    Still I think a cheaper dual would suit this situation.
    True, but it seems the OP wants the best gaming cpu without any overclocking, but to be honest both CPUs will handle any game/app very well.
    Cavalier-X: Biostar TP45-HP ¦ E4600@3.1ghz - Xigmatek Red Scorpion (OCZ Freeze) ¦ OCZ ReaperX 2x2gb (792mhz @ 4-4-4--12) ¦ Xigmatek NRP-MC651 ¦
    Palit 8800gt ¦ X-fi Fatal1ty Gamer ¦ Coolermaster Cavalier 3 (Silver/Windowed) ¦

    Poseidon Magma: MSI P45 Zilent ¦ E6300@3.0ghz - Coolermaster Hyper 212 (MX-2) ¦ Corsair 2x2gb (880mhz @ 5-5-5-15) ¦ Corsair HX450w ¦
    xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition (780/1950/1000) ¦ X-fi Gamer ¦ Gigabyte Poseiden ¦

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    148
    Thanks
    56
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    So a dual core 2 is better than a quad for gaming taken into account the price/speed

    Is the E8500 a good overclocker? thanks
    Last edited by shrek101; 17-08-2008 at 09:32 PM.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Betty_Swallocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Feet up, spliff lit.
    Posts
    1,139
    Thanks
    70
    Thanked
    60 times in 44 posts
    • Betty_Swallocks's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z97-A
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5 4690K o/c to 4.6 gHz
      • Memory:
      • 8Gb DDR3
      • Storage:
      • 256Gb SSD + 1320Gb (3x SATA drives)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI R9 390 8Gb
      • PSU:
      • Corsair CS750M
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake Shark
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 37" Samsung TV @1920x1080 + Dell 20.1" TFT secondary screen
      • Internet:
      • 150Mb Virgin Media cable

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Quote Originally Posted by staffsMike View Post
    Very little difference but if all 4 cores can be used the e8400 is left for dead.
    But that's the point. IF all 4 cores can be used you're perfectly correct. But hardly any applications and no games that I'm aware of utilise 4 cores.
    "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having."

  16. #16
    Senior Member Mithrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,746
    Thanks
    461
    Thanked
    370 times in 188 posts
    • Mithrandir's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Biostar TP45-HP
      • CPU:
      • C2D e4600 (w/ Xigmatek Red Scorpion)
      • Memory:
      • OCZ ReaperX (2x2gb)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung F1 500gb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition
      • PSU:
      • Xigmatek NRP-MC651
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster Cavalier 3 silver (windowed)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Fujitsu Siemens SCALEOVIEW D22W-1

    Re: Duo E8400 3.0 GHz or Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz?

    Quote Originally Posted by shrek101 View Post
    So a dual core 2 is better than a quad for gaming taken into account the price/speed

    Is the E8500 a good overclocker? thanks
    A higher clock speed (and higher L2 cache) will be much better for gaming.


    If your budget can stretch to the e8600 then they are supposedly very good O'clockers. They seem to go to 5ghz.
    Cavalier-X: Biostar TP45-HP ¦ E4600@3.1ghz - Xigmatek Red Scorpion (OCZ Freeze) ¦ OCZ ReaperX 2x2gb (792mhz @ 4-4-4--12) ¦ Xigmatek NRP-MC651 ¦
    Palit 8800gt ¦ X-fi Fatal1ty Gamer ¦ Coolermaster Cavalier 3 (Silver/Windowed) ¦

    Poseidon Magma: MSI P45 Zilent ¦ E6300@3.0ghz - Coolermaster Hyper 212 (MX-2) ¦ Corsair 2x2gb (880mhz @ 5-5-5-15) ¦ Corsair HX450w ¦
    xfx 9600gt Alphadog edition (780/1950/1000) ¦ X-fi Gamer ¦ Gigabyte Poseiden ¦

  17. Received thanks from:

    shrek101 (17-08-2008)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 3.0 ghz OC on a Q6600 [G0] - What air cooling ?
    By godsdog in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 21-07-2007, 07:25 PM
  2. Which is faster, 9x333 or 8x375 on a q6600? Results inside
    By graysky in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 17-07-2007, 11:54 AM
  3. Dell 19" TFT, P4 3.0 Ghz £316
    By marlyred in forum Retail Therapy and Bargains
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 25-03-2005, 10:56 PM
  4. AMD64 CPU's, MANY questions!
    By SilentDeath in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-11-2004, 03:37 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •