Q6600 or Q9450?

[VroomBang]

Hi guys,

I'm gonna need a new processor for a gigabyte mobo GA-P35-DS3 with 4GB DDR2 Mushkin 1066 Redline and a GeForce 7950GT 512MB.

With the new Quads Q9xxx being released, I'm not sure whether to buy the hard to get Q9450 or instead go for the ubiquitous Q6600.

I intend to make the most of my 7950GT in WinXP with current and old games for a year or so before upgrading to a DX10 graphics card, as long as I can play @1027x768 @ 60fps with full details on .

What CPU would you recommend? Will the 12MB cache in the Q9450 make a big difference over the 8MB in the Q6600?

 

[DanishDevil]

I'm not an Intel guy, but I will tell you this. The large amount of cache on Intel CPUs might be a gimmick. I did hear this from an AMD lover, though, so I'm not exactly sure how much of a difference that it makes.

If you do decide for the Q6600, I have one on sale that's sealed in its retail box.

 

[Darknova]

I'm not an Intel guy, but I will tell you this. The large amount of cache on Intel CPUs might be a gimmick. I did hear this from an AMD lover, though, so I'm not exactly sure how much of a difference that it makes.

If you do decide for the Q6600, I have one on sale that's sealed in its retail box.

Unfortunately it's not a gimmick. The cache is needed because everything uses the FSB instead of using a HTT link like AMD does.

Anyway, I guess it depends entirely on what you need it for and how much you'll overclock it.

Also, with your 7950GT I think you should be able to play at 1280x1024, and even with medium settings it'd look far superior to 1024x768 at any setting....

 

[VroomBang]

I don't want to go below 60fps in Crysis with full details and filters on, which sould be possible @1024x768, but probably not @1280x1024 with a 7950GT. I'm using a 19" monitor, and I don't see a big gain from one resolution to the other.

 

[Darknova]

I don't want to go below 60fps in Crysis with full details and filters on, which sould be possible @1024x768, but probably not @1280x1024 with a 7950GT.

35fps is all you need for smooth play. And even at medium Crysis looked amazing at 1280. That's what I used to run it at when I had my 1950XT.

 

[Wile E]

I don't want to go below 60fps in Crysis with full details and filters on, which sould be possible @1024x768, but probably not @1280x1024 with a 7950GT. I'm using a 19" monitor, and I don't see a big gain from one resolution to the other.

I don't think it's even possible at 1024x768 maxed out. Crysis is a hog.

 

[X800]

Here you can fin find an early test of Q9450 vs Q6600 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=173287
But this is an protype of Q9450 but it is still faster even if the Q6600 have higher clocks.

 

[VroomBang]

Here you can fin find an early test of Q9450 vs Q6600 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=173287
But this is an protype of Q9450 but it is still faster even if the Q6600 have higher clocks.

In the test, both cpu's run at 3.6Ghz (8x450Mhz). Performance wise, you gain 6.66% with the Q9450. I like the fact that the Q9450 runs cooler and needs less power, which means less noise, or stable overclocks with lower cooling costs.

However, $100 more for the Q9450 is a deterrent. I find the Q6600 a much better value for money proposition, given the small performance gain with the Q9450. I can't see this making a significant difference in games but it's still very early days I guess.

 

[DanishDevil]

With almost all games, your video card is going to matter a lot more than your processor, so you won't see a difference in games. You might get an extra FPS or two in Crysis with a 7% better processor.

 

[VroomBang]

oh wow, a whole 2 fps! Absolutely no point.

 

[X800]

This is can be compared to a Q6600 or a Xeon 3220http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=181405

 

[X800]

oh wow, a whole 2 fps! Absolutely no point.

Ofcourse its no point but you get a cooler cpu=less heat a little preformance gain
But then again if you want the newest you have to the little extra
I the end of the month the Q6600 is going to be much cheaper becuse intel is cutting prices (the new 45nm cpus is the reason) and then the Q6600 is great cpu for the money.
I did order an Q9450 and hope it meets my expectations

 

[Jarman]

i had a 7900gt extreme running crysis. It was voltmodded and heavily clocked (was in excess of a 7950gt) and it could not really do 1280x1024 at medium settings. It would do it....but was very choppy in places. Probably better investing in an 8800gt or something

 

[VroomBang]

i had a 7900gt extreme running crysis. It was voltmodded and heavily clocked (was in excess of a 7950gt) and it could not really do 1280x1024 at medium settings. It would do it....but was very choppy in places. Probably better investing in an 8800gt or something

yep, that's what I thought, which is why I'll stay at 1024X768 in Crysis. I'd rather play at a lower resolution with better IQ than the other way around, and hopefully gain a few fps (10-20?) as well.

 

[PaulieG]

As others are saying, right now the q6600 is a much better price to performance cpu. You just have to ask yourself, is a Q9450 and a 2-7% difference in overall performance worth an extra $100? In my eyes it's not.

 

[Nitro-Max]

There aint nothing out that would run crysis at 60fps on full detail {very High} 2 or 3 GX2s might but i wouldnt put money on it or spend the money on it lol.
Crysis is more advanced than current hardware atm even the best cpu overclocked might not buy you that much fps its one awsome power hungry game.

 

[Squirrely]

With the q6600 and q6450, Intel is getting as bad as Nvidia with naming its chips.

From reviews of the q6450 and q6600, its all price vs performance. The q6600 still wins in that catergory, so I would go with that.

Also, 60fps in Crysis with maxed settings is almost unheard of. Crysis is a beast, lol. Crytek realized this, so they took the Ultra High setting out of the game. They are going to release it down the road, since the current graphic cards are having a bit of trouble with the current Highest setting (with AA and AF on).

 

[Jarman]

ultra high is directx 10 "only". can run in XP though. I just bought an E8200 wolfdale for a second pc...really good, running at 4.2GHz. I have a quad in my main machine..but theres really no need for it.

An e8200 with an 8800GT will get u a hell of a lot more fps than a q6600 with a 7950GT.

 

[trog100]

why are people so misinformed.. buying a new super quad aint gonna make any difference to how games like crysis play.. only a better grafix card (or two) will do that..

the new 45nm quad cpus when they arrive are better than the older ones.. but the only way the difference will be seen is by running benchmarks.. in real life the difference wont be noticed..

but being as the things aint gonna be available in quantities for two or three months the argument is purely academic..

just dont kid yourselfs that buying one will help u play crysis.. it wont..

trog

 

[Jarman]

they r good 4 rendering though

 

[Fitseries3]

i'd get the q6700 that's on sale today and every saturday at www.ClubIT.com for $299. (i ordered one last night)

the q6700 is an awesome chip with a 10x multi and almost guarantees into 4ghz for sure.

 

[mep916]

i'd get the q6700 that's on sale today and every saturday at www.ClubIT.com for $299. (i ordered one last night)

Wow! That's an excellent deal. You think 4GHz is achievable with air cooling? I'm runnin the Zalman 9700, at the moment.

 

[Jarman]

im not sure that they do a G0 version of the q6700..no1 ever buys 1

 

[Fitseries3]

im not sure that they do a G0 version of the q6700..no1 ever buys 1

what? the Q6700 IS a G0 chip. they only made G0 q6700's. your thinking of the QX 6700. the Q6700 is way better than a Q6600, q9450, and q9550.

 

[trog100]

i'd get the q6700 that's on sale today and every saturday at www.ClubIT.com for $299. (i ordered one last night)

the q6700 is an awesome chip with a 10x multi and almost guarantees into 4ghz for sure.

10 x 400 = 4 gig.. 9 x 450 = 4 gig.. its possible that it wont go any better than the 6600.. but 4 gig should be easier if its the fsb holding the 6600 back.. i wouldnt be so sure.. the big money difference stopped most from buying it.. but a higher multiplier aint gonna do any harm..

think what the next step up costs.. he he

trog