q6600/e8400??

coolest111 · 10-04-2008, 01:21 AM

q6600/e8400??

if u have orkut account see this
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?c...118352&start=1
pls help

Pathik · 10-04-2008, 02:30 AM

E8400 Imo

coolest111 · 10-04-2008, 02:52 AM

Pls More I Hve 2 Make A Decision......

kooki · 10-04-2008, 09:25 AM

im stuck with the same choice. q6600 is future proof, e8400 seems to be really good with the 45nm chips. e4500 seems to be the best value for money.
gosh even i cant decide.

hellgate · 10-04-2008, 09:25 AM

get the E8400.it runs cooler and oc's better as compared to Q6600.

DigitalDude · 10-04-2008, 10:04 AM

Q6600 - if you are primarily into 3D rendering programs/CAD packages or Media encoding stuff cos not much games use of Quad cores...

E8400 - if you are primarily into games/general performance

E4500 - if you are on a budget and want a basic C2D

_

rahulmig · 10-04-2008, 10:04 AM

get e8400.. price slashed ........by intel...

jithudigitised · 10-04-2008, 10:07 AM

has the prices been slahed for 45 nm chips.The news was that the 65 nm chips prices will drop.
If yes,,then greattt

DigitalDude · 10-04-2008, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rahulmig

get e8400.. price slashed ........by intel...

whats the current price rahul ??

Dell is also giving Q6600 as the only option in its XPS desktop.... guess Intel is pushing it to clear stock for new Quad cores...

OT: also plzz get the price of 9800 GT that you said available in the other thread

_

nish_higher · 10-04-2008, 10:35 AM

currrent games do not support Quads and when they do , will dual cores perform better? - NO
and its not a major performance difference now- i'd suggest a Quad - be it a 65nm or a 45nm one.

coolest111 · 10-04-2008, 10:40 AM

i can buy q6600 / e8400....
i am not in much 3D rendering programs/CAD packages or Media encoding stuff.....
but photoshop cs3 etc will b usually used......
pls help

Pathik · 10-04-2008, 10:46 AM

No point getting a 65nm proccy now, And for your needs even an e8400 is overkilll

coolest111 · 10-04-2008, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pathik

No point getting a 65nm proccy now, And for your needs even an e8400 is overkilll

WHY??

nish_higher · 10-04-2008, 12:08 PM

65 nm dual cores make no sense , but a Q6600 is certainly a great buy - considering that a 45nm Quad will cost more than 16000 for now

ring_wraith · 10-04-2008, 12:10 PM

Are you kidding? Q6600, no doubt!

Right now, very few programs actually support multi-cores. But Multi-threading is going to be the emphasis in the near future, not improving performance of each core.

Therefore, get a Q6600, you won't regret it.

DigitalDude · 10-04-2008, 12:41 PM

^^^
but I buy for present performance... I cant put my money thinking developers would embrace 4 cores in the near future suddenly while C2Qs have been out for a long time but yet to see satisfactory response from Game developers

so for my perspective E8400 is better than Q6600 at present.. for the performance per buck you put in..

but if you really think more games are gonna see effective use of multi cores such that there will be a significant performance difference compared to C2Ds in the near future then theres nothing wrong in buying a C2Q

but I just dont buy into that idea

_

nish_higher · 10-04-2008, 12:46 PM

every single software is moving to Quad core now..this is enought to convince yourself for a quad core

.we will see Quads and DDR3 go mainstream by the end of this year..so if u only want a good performance till that time and can change a proccy then, a dual core is good !

DigitalDude · 10-04-2008, 01:13 PM

^^^
hmmm lets see

maybe in the coming months if what you say really manifests substantially then C2Qs would seem attractive to me

better I will go and see a few demos.. so that I can get a better Idea

_

Extreme Gamer · 10-04-2008, 01:47 PM

e8400.get a quad when 32nm chips come oout.e8400 OC's like a monster u can take it to 4ghz+ with a good cooler like U12E

coolest111 · 10-04-2008, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extreme Gamer

e8400.get a quad when 32nm chips come oout.e8400 OC's like a monster u can take it to 4ghz+ with a good cooler like U12E

wont b used for too much overclocking......

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigitalDude

^^^
but I buy for present performance... I cant put my money thinking developers would embrace 4 cores in the near future suddenly while C2Qs have been out for a long time but yet to see satisfactory response from Game developers

so for my perspective E8400 is better than Q6600 at present.. for the performance per buck you put in..

but if you really think more games are gonna see effective use of multi cores such that there will be a significant performance difference compared to C2Ds in the near future then theres nothing wrong in buying a C2Q

but I just dont buy into that idea

_

i agree 2 u but for 1-2 yrs frm now will not upgrade it so e8400 will suit me???

Extreme Gamer · 10-04-2008, 03:38 PM

by all means yess!!!!!!!! e8400 will suit you.q9650 is gonna come out in 1-2 yrs and 32nm is also round the corner

ring_wraith · 10-04-2008, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigitalDude

but I just dont buy into that idea

You don't buy the idea? What the hell does that mean? More cores are the future, and you know it. There's only so far you can push one core without increasing power requirements irrationally.

coolest111 · 10-04-2008, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extreme Gamer

by all means yess!!!!!!!! e8400 will suit you.q9650 is gonna come out in 1-2 yrs and 32nm is also round the corner

every tech have to b old someday.......
thanx anyways waiting 4 more suggestions....
getting in a weak or two so pls reply....

DigitalDude · 10-04-2008, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ring_wraith

You don't buy the idea? What the hell does that mean? More cores are the future, and you know it. There's only so far you can push one core without increasing power requirements irrationally.

you are perfectly correct... more cores are the future and that more than one core you say is 'dual' for me at present... maybe I dont forsee a bleeding edge requirement for me in the near future

so I dont believe C2Qs can be fully exploited at present or in the near future by ppl who dont have anything to do with rendering/media encoding and allied segments that already have softwares that take advantage of that much cores

what I dont buy is the idea of getting a 65nm C2Q for some more price, with the anticipation of quadcores being utilised fully in the near future, infavour of a better 45nm C2D with a higher clock and bus speed

that will give me full bang for the buck right from day 1.....

this survey is the most comprehensive hardware survey representing gamers system profiles.. just have a look:
http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

btw not much affecting our discussions but still I will just tell this... Intel C2Qs are just two dualcores sandwiched together... only AMD has native Quadcores though performance wise it sucks...

_

Extreme Gamer · 10-04-2008, 04:16 PM

crysis,the only game using a quad,scales better with a duo.what can you say to that?quads will be needed 2-3 years later

coolest111 · 10-04-2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extreme Gamer

crysis,the only game using a quad,scales better with a duo.what can you say to that?quads will be needed 2-3 years later

no way we will see a change in 6 months(approx)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigitalDude

you are perfectly correct... more cores are the future and that more than one core you say is 'dual' for me at present... maybe I dont forsee a bleeding edge requirement for me in the near future

so I dont believe C2Qs can be fully exploited at present or in the near future by ppl who dont have anything to do with rendering/media encoding and allied segments that already have softwares that take advantage of that much cores

what I dont buy is the idea of getting a 65nm C2Q for some more price, with the anticipation of quadcores being utilised fully in the near future, infavour of a better 45nm C2D with a higher clock and bus speed

that will give me full bang for the buck right from day 1.....

this survey is the most comprehensive hardware survey representing gamers system profiles.. just have a look:
http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

btw not much affecting our discussions but still I will just tell this... Intel C2Qs are just two dualcores sandwiched together... only AMD has native Quadcores though performance wise it sucks...

_

i agree 2 u.....