EggXpert

I have had so much trouble deciding which one is truly better.

 

The Q6600 has 4 cores, 2.4GHz , a 2x4MB L2 Cache , and 65nm tubes: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115017

The E8400 has 2 cores, 3GHz, a 6MB L2 Cache, and 45nm tubes: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037

I plan to use the chosen core for ~3.5->4.5 years, and i want you to ignore the prices for these.

The Q6600 from what I've seen has 2 more cores, but 0.6GHz less, and 20nm longer tubes.
The E8400 has 2 Less cores, but .6GHz more and 40nm shorter tubes.

Now I'm confused on the cache, whats different with the 2 4MB Cores compared to the 1 6MB Core? The Quad has more Cache size overall, but is taking the 0.6GHz drop worth the 2 more cores and 2MB Cache?

It's extremely hard for me to tell I'm going to use these for gaming - I occasionally dualbox on games, too (once every 3-5 days). I Do NOT overclock, so these are going to stay at retail settings.

The people (4/5 of them) that replied with opinion that(on L2 Forums) the Duo core is better, I don't know if they're saying that by truth or only since Lineage 2 runs on 2 cores max. My Brother and Dad say the Quad core is better, mainly because of the 2 more cores. Help!

 

Gaming examples: Crysis, CSS, Savage 2 , World of Warcraft, Lineage 2 will all be the most played with an occasional running of EverQuest 2 , WC3 and so forth. I plan to buy SUN MMO when it comes out. Please answer with overall better status of PSU, not by the games i play though.

Personally, I prefer the E8400 since it uses less power and has newer technology in it.. But to a lot of people, power consumption and heat aren't problems.

As to things besides that, what else is there that made you chose your Duo core?

Like you said, cooling &  power isn't a deal for me, performance is the thing i want to shine.

 

edit: And what kind of "new technologies" are there in this, too? I heard someone on the L2 forums say this too. 

here is a post you may be interested in

http://www.eggxpert.com/forums/thread/321341.aspx

aggiedad:

here is a post you may be interested in

http://www.eggxpert.com/forums/thread/321341.aspx

 

Thank you. 

your welcome hope it helps ( I'm fixing to have to make the same decision) Good Luck

If you don't care about cooling and power, the Q6600 may be much more suitable for you. Larger L2 cache, more and newer cores .The only thing you should take care is to install a good OS to exert its potential. 

If you plan on using it for 3 years plus go with the quad. Like in that link which is better have 4 brains or 2 brains. Even with the .6 less of speed you wont notice the difference. I upgraded from a dual to a quad and notice a difference in programs and apps loading time. You cant really say this but with the quad you'll be "future proofing" your build for a while. Even though the dual would run cooler, and use less power, the difference is so small it would take years to see the difference, and by that time you might be wishing you have just bought the quad if you got with the dual core. Cooling isn't an issue just buy a Zalman 9700 or another aftermarket cooler and that will solve all your issues. And if anything give you more room to overclock.

aggiedad, pretty nice link.

lol i would go with Q6600 with 2 more cores and more cache size overall. My friends gave me their price list in this way. 

E8400 219 / 2 = $109.50 per core
Q6600 - 277 / 4 =$69.25 per core (or even cheaper with OEM)

lol guess Q6600 offers more bang for the buck and still has a lot of processing power to spare. and quad is also good for multi-tasking. OC'ing Q6600 and playing games does really show increase in performance. Vista does use all 4 cores efficiently. XD

Thank You maple 29

I have a question that kind'of goes off of this question. I am building a new pc and I'm looking at going with a P45 north bridge, which all have 1333/1600 fsb. Does this mean that I wouldnt be able to use the Q6600 with a P45 mobo since it only has 1066 fsb?

Also, say i didnt go with a P45 but the mobo i bought still only supports 1333/1600 fsb, would I still not be able to use the Q6600 with it?? 

 

Thanks!

I believe that the fsb would clock lower dow nto match the fsb of your q6600. But im not 100% Ive built plenty of intel machines but for some reason I havent ever dealt with one of those boards.

My Q6600 is running with FSB 1333 @ 3.0GHZ.  Not exactly an overclock.  I just moved a jumper on my motherboard and........presto, a 3GHZ Quad.  Runs at a respectable 37C idle and mid to high 40s while gaming.  In my case, the Q6600 definitely becomes a better value when matched against an E8400.

Hope this helps.

A truely drawn out agrument thats been going on for months now...

let me put it to you plain and simple.

OC'er + Gamer = E8400

Multi Tasker + Gamer + OC'er + Graphic Designer = Q6600.

It's dependant on you. games are just now starting to get the multi-core thing now. the only games I knbow of that take advantage of a quad core are Assassins creed, Crysis, Unreal Tournamnet III and Super commander.

As far as overclocks go. Dual cores are much easier to overclock and run much cooler in general. if you're a hard core gamer and web surfer get a E8400. If you're those things and like to multi-taks a lot. I'm talking running a virus scan, listening to a playlist, playing COD4 and burning a CD all at once.... then get a Q6600. its that simple.

It's a matter of if your computer life is worth 2 cores or 4. And that is dependant on how you use your comp.