 A4L
@asianet.co.th | Core 2 Duo E8400 vs. Core 2 Quad Q6600 So which one is better? I was thinking of C2Q, but since the price is the same and I've read that C2D one would be better for the price as have 4 cores is essentially useless in gaming. I'd like to know what you guys think. |
|
 CabalPremium
join:2007-01-21
Austin, TX | E8500 for $180 retail, watch the Newegg promos. |
|
 The FlashYou don't win friends with saladPremium
join:2002-10-17
Toronto, ON
kudos:1 | reply to A4L
For gaming it has to be the E8400. |
|
A4L
@asianet.co.th | reply to A4L
Interesting. I actually find it weird since that's got 4 cores and this has got 2 but you still say this is better. Why? |
|
The FlashYou don't win friends with saladPremium
join:2002-10-17
Toronto, ON
kudos:1 | More cores does not mean it's better, right now core speed is better for gaming. |
|
 MchartFirst There.
join:2004-01-21
Gurnee, IL | reply to A4L
said by A4L :
Interesting. I actually find it weird since that's got 4 cores and this has got 2 but you still say this is better. Why?
Because it has a higher clock-speed, a faster front side bus, and more L2 Cache. There are currently no games that utilize more then two cores, otherwise, the quad-core would technically be better for gaming. Currently however, it is not. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Cox HSI
| reply to A4L
I pondered the same question and then went with the E8400 (C0 stepping) and don't regret it. I run it @ 3.4 GHz (8.5 x 400 MHz) with air cooling 24/7 with no issues at all. The cores idle at 32c and don't rise much above 38c during gaming. The C2D's will run cooler than the quads and tend to be easier to overclock if you plan to do that. The newer E0 stepping 8400's are even better. If you are mainly interested in gaming, I would jump on the 8400. If you plan to do a lot of number crunching and have apps that will take advantage of 4 cores, go with the quad.
--
My Jeep is not an SUV. Your SUV is not a Jeep. |
|
 psitoolBeware ManBearPigPremium
join:2002-11-28
Albany, Ga
1 edit | reply to A4L
Go with the E8400. They are overclocking beasts. I've been running mine at 4.3ghz (8.5 x 506) on air for months. 
--
The cake is a lie. |
|
A4L
@asianet.co.th | reply to A4L
What about the future? Say 1-2 years? Would then the C2Q be better for gaming? I'm asking because I want it to game well for at least 2-3 years. |
|
A4L
@asianet.co.th | reply to A4L
BTW, I'm not going to OC it for two reason:
1.) I do not know how to.
2.) I do not want to take a risk. |
|
MchartFirst There.
join:2004-01-21
Gurnee, IL | reply to A4L
said by A4L :
What about the future? Say 1-2 years? Would then the C2Q be better for gaming? I'm asking because I want it to game well for at least 2-3 years.
The future is great, but I don't expect any games coming out in 2009 to be quad-core capable. Even games that use dual-core right now don't do so very efficiently. The best bet if buying a system right now is the E8400.
Besides, if you need to, you can always buy a quad-core down the road if you need to.
However, i'd reccomend waiting until Novemeber. As this is when Nehalem comes out, and the prices on socket 775 products will come down substantially - And you can purchase a Nehalem product if you have the money. |
|
A4L
@asianet.co.th | reply to A4L
Yep, you've told me about that. So basically the Nehalem is going to be like 8 cores thing, like a step up from C2Q or is it a new line of microprocessors? Kinda like how Core 2 was the new line a year back?
And how much would it be? If it's less than $250 then I'm in.
And what's the difference between E8400 and E8500? I see E8400 to be more "popular" among people... And if I get the E8400, will I be fine in games like Crysis, FarCry 2, and the games in 2009-10? |
|
MchartFirst There.
join:2004-01-21
Gurnee, IL
1 edit | said by A4L :
Yep, you've told me about that. So basically the Nehalem is going to be like 8 cores thing, like a step up from C2Q or is it a new line of microprocessors? Kinda like how Core 2 was the new line a year back?
And how much would it be? If it's less than $250 then I'm in.
And what's the difference between E8400 and E8500? I see E8400 to be more "popular" among people... And if I get the E8400, will I be fine in games like Crysis, FarCry 2, and the games in 2009-10?
It's a new microarchitecture. It should be quite a leap in performance for Intel, as they have finally moved the memory controller on-die with Nehalem - Not to mention they have a triple channel memory bus as well. It will be just as expensive as any new CPU line is when it is first released. This means however, that the current line of socket 775 based products will be cheaper.
The only difference between the E8400 and E8500 is that the E8500 has an amazing 160mhz additional clock speed, and a different multiplier. If you aren't overclocking, the E8500 is a complete waste of money.
Yes, the E8400 will be way more then enough for any game coming out in the foreseable future.
The reason I reccomend getting a Nehalem system in November is because it will last longer. Once Nehalem comes out - Socket 775 is done. Intel will still sell 775 products for at least 2 more years after the fact - But they won't be releasing anything new. Where as if you buy Nehalem - You'll be able to drop in a Westmere CPU when those come out. |
|
A4L
@asianet.co.th | reply to A4L
That's really interesting. So let's see about Nehalem. I'll check out it if it releases here in Bangkok by December. And if I can't afford that or it doesn't come out here by then, I'll probably just get the E8400. |
|
A4L
@asianet.co.th | reply to A4L
Another thing I was wondering. How much difference does it make to get a sound card? I was initially thinking not to get one and just use an onboard. But does getting a sound card make a difference? I mean I don't give a fuck about the sound I get in games, I mean does it improve the FPS or does it make the songs sound better? Or does that have nothing to do with a sound card and only with speaker? |
|
MchartFirst There.
join:2004-01-21
Gurnee, IL | said by A4L :
Another thing I was wondering. How much difference does it make to get a sound card? I was initially thinking not to get one and just use an onboard. But does getting a sound card make a difference? I mean I don't give a fuck about the sound I get in games, I mean does it improve the FPS or does it make the songs sound better? Or does that have nothing to do with a sound card and only with speaker?
Onboard sound on quality motherboards these days is very good. There is absolutely no reason to get a sound card unless you want high-quality inputs, or need a plethora of output options. At this point it really is all about the quality of your speakers. People will claim sound cards somehow allow better sounding audio; But on-board HD Audio codec's are capable of floating point operations, and while they may be vulnerable to noise from other circuitry on the motherboard - This is a non-issue if you have a decent motherboard. |
|
|
|
A4L
@asianet.co.th | reply to A4L
Hmm, motherboards are something I don't know much about. Can you recommend me some good motherboards (socket 775) with good onboard sound card? |
|
| My latest build uses an ASUS Maximus II Formula which comes with a Creative Supreme FX PCIEX card. It all works great and has made me a fan of the P45 chipset boards.
--
My Jeep is not an SUV. Your SUV is not a Jeep. |
|
| reply to A4L
My current system is using the EVGA 750i SLI FTW. If you aren't planning on SLI, the P45 chipset is a good choice for right now. |
|
phaqu
join:2005-05-26
Marietta, GA | reply to A4L
said by A4L :
Hmm, motherboards are something I don't know much about. Can you recommend me some good motherboards (socket 775) with good onboard sound card?
I got an EVGA 780i MB , but I wanted SLI.....I also have the Q6600 slacr chip. Neither were too bad in price , probably even cheaper now.
Ive no complaints. |
|
