1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

show me that a q6600 is no good now

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by Shambles1980, May 6, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Shambles1980

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Messages:
    468 (5.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    79
    Ok,
    basically i know that the q6600 is considered ancient in terms of computing power.
    But i just cant seem to justify an i3 or low cost i5 because i simply dont see how they can actually be that much better.
    I dont mean the higest value i5's and i7's I mean the run of the mill i dont have much money but lets try to get up to date buy's and spending as little as possible to get more performance..

    Any way i have always over clocked computers. just something i always did started off by deliberatly setting the jumpers wrong and hoping the house didnt burn down. untill now where i try and balance the performance to longevity and most importaintly having a stable system that i can game on for 16 hours straight if i so wish..

    So here we go..

    My Q6600 stable Oc on air.
    3.8-3.9Ghz on the cpu is probably possible but not with this ram. and voltage restrictions on this board.
    tweaked what i could.
    had the ram up to 1000 (its ddr2 800) but had to pump a lot of voltage to it i did not like that.

    The long and short of it is what i was comfortable overclocking to with the voltages i would use and the ram would let me was.
    Fsb 412
    Cpu 3.7
    ram 824 mhs
    [​IMG]
    gpu 1150
    gddr 1300 (1350 gave some purple artifacts)
    http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/kwkxx/

    this then gave me the following scores..
    Ice storm
    114107
    cloud gate
    13295
    fire strike
    4811
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3016922
    With this setup like it is i can get full usage out of my cpu and gpu when gaming with lots of bells and whistles in thief at 1280x1024
    low points of 55 fps highs of 100+ avarage about 65 ish id say.

    I may try and get it 3.75ghz stable on the cpu and 1001mhz stable on the ram. But the latencys suffer a lot when i go to 1000mhz and i should probably just get 1066 ddr2 ram if i want to push it any futher.

    the gpu i am pretty happy with "i dont want artifacts" and at 60c full load the fan sits at about 25-30% so thats always good.
    honestly though if i crank it up as far as i could go for a single test with all the fans i have wired up and cooling the whole system down at full thottle
    i dont think i would be able to squeeze any more than 5000 from fire strike test.
    And i dont see the point in an overclock you cant use every day..

    Now what i would like to see is Lower end i5's and i3's or amd apu equivalent that have ran the 3dmark test and the results.
    if you have a 7850 or nvidia equivalent, is it a 660?... not sure i would be most interested in those results. valid test preferable no gpu physics


    -=EDIT=-

    if you want to just see what happened when i tested the q6600 at 3.0 vs a fx-8120 locked at 3.1 with occasional throteling down to 2.8ghz then here it is


    Last edited: May 16, 2014
  2. Vario

    Vario

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,833 (0.88/day)
    Thanks Received:
    890
    You are playing 1280x1024! You should be able to run everything at that resolution. At 1920x1080 or higher you would have slow down.

    What is your 3dmark11 physics score?
    Last edited: May 7, 2014
  3. natr0n

    natr0n

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,812 (1.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    932
    As long as you can still play modern games, then nothing to worry about.
  4. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,999 (6.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,946
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    An i5 or better will probably outperform your Q6600 but whether or not it makes a difference on your experience depends on the game. Do you feel you need more performance? That's really the question you should ask yourself when it comes to upgrading because if you don't need it, it's a waste.
    Benchmarks have shown that higher resolutions are less CPU dependent than lower resoltutions. CPU becomes a bottleneck generally as the framerate gets higher and lower resolutions puts less stress on the GPU and more on the CPU because the GPU is getting stuff done faster at lower resolutions.
    Vario says thanks.
  5. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    17,083 (5.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,513
    Location:
    Florida
    Does it do what you want it to?

    Honestly people were playing 1080p games back in the Q6600 day and its still the standard, regardless of what 4k elitists will tell you i-finity and multi monitor gaming setups still dont have nearly the market saturation people claim it does.

    I used to be into the whole crazy OC water cooling 2 PSUs down to fan RPM BS then i realized I wanted to pay off my house and in the end I got to say i beat the score of 17yr/o in 3dmark it wasnt worth the money any more and honestly the PC did everything I wanted it to.

    I can sit here and tell you to get a 3.6ghz I7 8 core machine with 32gb of ram and SLI titans but it wont do shit for you if all you do is log into AOL desktop 9.7
    Frogger, Vario and Aquinus say thanks.
  6. Shambles1980

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Messages:
    468 (5.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    79
    i can quite happily game at 1024x768 provided it is smooth. 1280x1024 is perfectly adequate for me. although i wouldnt mind being able to put absolutley everything on full at those resolutions click v-synk and never drop below 60fps.

    I also like to over clock always have done. just having kids (one is a teen the other will be 3 in december) kind of makes money tight lol. so im stuck with my old cpu. I cant see it surviving another gpu upgrade to be honest. right now its as ballanced as i can make it be, with full usage of gpu and cpu available. i dont go in for console gaming. only ever liked forza really. i have much more pleasure from my computer..

    any way. in regards to my 3dmark 11 physics score..
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8304206
    Physics Score
    3916
    Combined Score
    3780

    not really that fussed about physics scores really. the chances of a game coming allong and needing that much of the cpu for physics is pretty slim. even so there they are.
    I am much more interested in the fire strike results of the new 3d mark.

    as for do i think i need more performace.. yes i do.. Can i affoard what i want? no not really..
    so thats what im trying to find out. what low cost i3 or i5 MAY be viable to me as an upgrade. would need a board ram and cpu and money constraints mean that i simply look at the things and compare the numbers and read reviews and forums. and i think well ok but to get better performance "in the real world" that i would consider an upgrade. im looking at spending a lot of money..

    What i do see a lot is people saying The q6600 will bottle neck a hd 6950 or hd 7770 but really it wont. Not unless the game needs a better cpu that is. because i can run my GPU and CPU at stress tests at the same time and get them both to 100%
    But im pretty sure im at about the limit of the cpu's ability. and its just not quite where i want to be.
    I dont need the best of the best. But i would like to see that my oppinion of the LGA 775 being the greatest socket that was ever created, and the Q6600 being the best processor intel ever made is now obsoleet and its time to move on.
    the only problem with that is the old performance to money equasions. and i have this much performance now (outlined above) which is "free" so to get exactly the same performance. the replacment needs to be "free" too or its a waste of money.. so i need to take that theory and apply it to similar results and then weigh up the costs and gains and decide which to get or just stay the same for now..
    Last edited: May 7, 2014
    XSI says thanks.
  7. THE_EGG

    THE_EGG

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,387 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    407
    Location:
    Brisbane QLD, Australia
    OK well I don't know how much this will help but I moved from a Q8400 to an i3-3220 in one of my 'spare' rigs that friends use for games when they come over. I found that the machine seemed a lot more snappy and responsive and also much, much cooler. I think the upgraded RAM also helped out with that. Gaming performance seemed to improve but I can't really say how much because I also upgraded the gpu at the same time to a 7850 1gb (coming from a 5770). That being said you can't really overclock an i3 so yeh....

    Maybe you could look at a second hand 2500k or 3570k?
  8. Shambles1980

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Messages:
    468 (5.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    79
    if you find the time to download the new 3d mark and post the results that would be very usefull those specs are very close to mine. and i also think bus speeds would play a bigger part than the raw numbers imply
  9. patrico

    patrico

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    280 (0.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Location:
    ireland, galway
    i have the same, gonna upgrade very soon, getting jealous of fast machines lol
  10. kn00tcn

    kn00tcn

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    661 (0.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    117
    Location:
    Toronto
    just... ignore everything 3dmark, period!

    do you encode videos or render in after effects or 3d tools? if yes, you'll notice any cpu boost

    for games, you need specifically demanding (or unoptimized) ones, so battlefields, large open worlds, MMOs, etc

    one thing to consider is all those things that use only 1 thread or just a couple, in this case you want faster per core performance, although it's great that you overclocked

    you could also merely look at your cpu & gpu usage during various workloads & decide if you need a boost or not
  11. Vario

    Vario

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,833 (0.88/day)
    Thanks Received:
    890
    Only reason I mentioned 3dmark11 is here are some comparisons, this doesn't show your q6600 as being no good, it rather shows it as still very relevant:

    (2010 era) Phenom II 965BE @ 4.0 ghz with 7850 at 24/7 1,180 MHz core 1,480 MHz mem
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/5304049
    P6129 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and AMD Phenom II X4 965
    Graphics Score
    6792
    Physics Score
    4810
    Combined Score
    4645

    (2011 era) i5-2550k at 3.1 deliberately underclocked, with ram at 1333, stock 7850 (this should simulate a lower end i5 as you had wanted this comparison):
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8305675
    P6047 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i5-2550K Processor
    Graphics Score
    6073
    Physics Score
    5959
    Combined Score
    5993

    (2011 era) stock i5 2550k stock ram stock 7850
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8305547
    P6207 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i5-2550K Processor
    Graphics Score
    6071
    Physics Score
    6722
    Combined Score
    6560

    i5 2550k @ 4.4 with 7850 stock
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7980370
    P6407 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i5-2550K Processor
    Graphics Score
    6054
    Physics Score
    8560
    Combined Score
    6817

    i5 2550k at 4.8 with 7850 at stock
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8305614
    P6459 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i5-2550K Processor
    Graphics Score
    6056
    Physics Score
    9165
    Combined Score
    6845

    i5 2550k at 4.8 with 7850 at 1050 core (Catalyst CC simple overclock)
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8305634
    P7445 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i5-2550K Processor
    Graphics Score
    7140
    Physics Score
    9138
    Combined Score
    7778

    i5 2550k at 4.4 with 7850 at 1100 core (custom bios, the card was not as stable with bios overclocking instead of driver oc.)
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7227143
    P7599 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i5-2550K Processor
    Graphics Score
    7389
    Physics Score
    8550
    Combined Score
    7973

    (2012 era) i7 3770k at 4.5 with 7850 stock
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7916796
    P6452 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i7-3770K Processor
    Graphics Score
    5935
    Physics Score
    10906
    Combined Score
    6731

    i7 3770k at 4.5 with 7850 at 1050 core oc
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7728675
    P7456 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and Intel Core i7-3770K Processor
    Graphics Score
    6980
    Physics Score
    10986
    Combined Score
    7692


    edit: added stock 2550k/7850 system run and your system to above for easy comparison!
    edit2: added a deliberately underclocked 2550k at 3.1 and ram at 1333 to simulate low end i5
    Last edited: May 7, 2014
    XSI says thanks.
  12. Fourstaff

    Fourstaff Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,159 (5.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,959
    Location:
    Home
    Its very simple: when you cannot stand your current computer, you upgrade! No need to get anyone to convince you to upgrade, you will know when you have to upgrade :D
  13. RCoon

    RCoon Forum Gypsy

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    6,510 (7.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,874
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    The term, "if it aint broke, fix it until it is" comes to mind. Q6600 is still a ballin' chip.
    PHaS3 says thanks.
  14. remixedcat

    remixedcat

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632 (1.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    546
    My sis uses one for video production and it's passable. She uses an older version of adobe premiere though.
  15. Vario

    Vario

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,833 (0.88/day)
    Thanks Received:
    890
    IMO, FPS Games that are graphically intense but not cpu intense won't care much if you run a q6600 or phenom II, but strategy games like SC2 would be very different. If OP is happy with it, keep using it. I liked my Phenom II a lot. The Intel 1155 stuff is noticeably faster for everything though, both gaming and general windows use.

    My friend now has my Phenom II + AsRock 970 Extreme 3 and a 5870, it is very capable. Other than its inability to run ram over 1333 stock, it competes with AMD's current line up.

    edit:

    doing one final run with i5 stuck at 3.1 and ram at 1333 to simulate a low end i5 2400.
    Last edited: May 7, 2014
    RCoon says thanks.
  16. micropage7

    micropage7

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,598 (3.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,284
    Location:
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    yep, if you buy or build pc just find what your needs, and many people still happy with their old pc.
  17. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,008 (11.72/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,402
    i went from a Q6600 -> E8400 -> Xeon E3120 -> 1090T x6 -> i5


    every single step of the way i saw a noticeable performance increase, and i overclocked every last one.

    your CPU is enough to run modern games, but performance is far from what it could be...


    3dmark doesnt tell you how real games perform. my 1090T to this CPU gave me a 30-40% FPS boost, for 50% less power used.
    XSI and Vario say thanks.
  18. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,392 (4.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,225
    My main rig is a q6600 and it performs very nicely for all of my needs. I play Total War Shogun and Company of Heroes on high settings at 1080p and it runs flawlessly. I am not even thinking about upgrading for another year.
    Vario and RCoon say thanks.
  19. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,008 (11.72/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,402
    remind me to play that with you for two reasons.


    1. i love that game

    2. i want to point out every time you lag :D
    Arjai and RCoon say thanks.
  20. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,485 (2.37/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,307
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
    I'm still using an E8600 (Core2 Duo Wolfdale). I've got it at 4.3Ghz, it played Crysis with a 5870 at 1920x1200 comfortably. There are other games much more CPU bound.
  21. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,392 (4.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,225
    Which game?
  22. grunt_408

    grunt_408

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Messages:
    2,026 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    485
    Location:
    Australia
    As long as it can run minesweeper , minecraft ect your good to go with that res......
  23. Kyuuba

    Kyuuba

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    48 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Man your best choice is an i5, I had one 2500 non K (that's a second gen) and it was excellent dude running with a PNY GTX 280, played so many games with it including metro 2033 back in 2011 at max settings 1280x720 and ran flawlessly.
  24. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,008 (11.72/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,402
    company of heroes, sorry.


    I also just built up an E6600 system with a 9600GT out of my spare parts thanks to this thread reminding me i had it, should run a benchmark or two...
  25. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    7,647 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,592
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    That and degrading performance at my preferred levels and resolutions would necessitate an upgrade. That or what's happened the last couple of times since my Q9650 and i5-760 builds was selling my rigs because I have friends that always want my rigs. It gives me an easy out to upgrading...hence the haswell build.

    :toast:

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page