Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > CPU's and Motherboards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 01:02 AM
chouchou's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 444
Default Q6600 vs Q9550. The extra 150$ worth it?

Yes, its roughly 150$ more.
I know i wont be able to afford an i7. This is the only upgrade i am contemplating.
Is the extra 150$ worth it? I have looked at benchmarks, and theres a bit of a difference, but i want a more personal opinion from members here at HWC.

If you had a budget, would you go for it? Yes, its 45nm. Yes, overclocking capabilities are much better as well as temp/volt control.

I plan on pairing this with a GTX260 (won't bottleneck this will it?) and an eVGA 750i FTW Mobo.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 01:07 AM
Chilly's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ontario
Posts: 2,593
Default

Depends, what are you on right now? From what you have is it really worth upgrading at this point and time? Have you thought of buying used? Having said that for approx $380ish buying new, I personally would say, no its not worth the $150 over a Q6600. Having said that if you have a motherboard that can take quads to a high level of FSB and you have the proper cooling, then I think I can eek out a SLIGHT win to the Q9550 where it might be worth it.

Frankly the Q6600's can go a fair distance thanks to their 9x multiplier with proper cooling. For a SINGLE 280 GTX I don't think your gonna be reaching a bottle neck with a Q6600 with even only a moderate OC to around 3.0GHz. A Q6600 should be able to get 3.4-3.6GHz with ease. That being said If you have the cash and don't mind spending it, the q9550 is great CPU which you should be able to eek 3.6-3.8GHz with ease, and if your motherboard lets you take the quad far enough (FSB wise 470-475) could be capable of 4.0GHz. This is ALL assuming proper/good cooling.

Also keep in mind that even at the same speeds (Q6600 at 3.2GHz vs Q9550 at 3.2GHz) the Q9550 should with with a 5-15% lead due to IPC improvements.

Last edited by Chilly; November 17, 2008 at 01:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 02:05 AM
chouchou's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 444
Default

I dont have either CPU right now, and am on a budget of roughly 1500 after taxes.
I'm planning on pairing this with a eVga 750i FTW Motherboard - and i hear they have decent overclocking ability and good voltage dispersion.
I'm kind of on the brink and choosing a p45 (p5q pro?) board instead because I dont know if I'm going to SLI right now.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 08:36 AM
encorp's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,425

My System Specs

Default

Get the Q6600, it's such a monster of a chip and there is no way at this point in time a 9550 is worth the extra money. If you OC that chip to 3.0ghz which is pretty easy on either of the boards you have in mind you're laughing.

The 750i is a great board, I have it. Works very well; but don't worry about SLI - spend the money on a good single card, GTX260 or 260-216 or a 280. So grab whichever board you feel best with.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in the immediately preceding post are those of encorp and do not reflect the views and/or opinions of family, friends, or anyone remotely associated with encorp unless explicitly stated. encorp does not make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any liability or responsibility for the quality, factuality or use of information in the immediately preceding post.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 10:21 AM
"Quote This..."
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 3,833
Default

I have a q6600 and gtx 260 overclocked to the hilt, scores 18,800 in 3DMark06. No cpu bottleneck there.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 11:04 AM
belgolas's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St. Thomas, Ontario
Posts: 3,954

My System Specs

Default

Yeah but some people get 4.0 ghz on air with the Q9550 but for a budget build I would rather get a faster GPU then a CPU because for gaming that is where you get most of your FPS. So if ya could save and get the Q6600 then you could use that money towards a GTX 280 or even a 4870 X2. Although for a mobo I would think a intel mobo would be better but that is only my opinion. But you could just get 2 GPU's and SLI them and get faster performance then the GTX 280.
__________________

Sponsor a child!
Fight poverty.

Qoute by Perineum
"ID10T. I just BETCHA he's got 9 toolbars on his web browser right now."
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 05:38 PM
chouchou's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 444
Default

The money saved from a 9550 could possibly go towards another gtx 260 and a nice sound card. + maybe a g15 2nd gen keyboard, and i'll be one hpapy camper. What do you guys think?
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 05:46 PM
magictorch's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Annapolis Valley, NS
Posts: 1,838

My System Specs

Default

Sounds good but why dont you go with a E8400 or E8500 instead? I guess the Q6600 is a better all rounder especially now games are finally using the extra threads and they can take a bit of punishment. Great idea to spend the extra on the vid card
__________________
White Night:: i7920 (4ghz), Rampage III extreme (A1), Mushkin XP 1600 (9,9,9,24),SLI480., white MM horizon.
CPU: Feser 220 int.|Apogee GTZ|S.Res.rev2| MCP655.

GPU: PA120.3|S.Res.rev2|2x EK FC blocks| MCP655.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 05:49 PM
chouchou's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 444
Default

Reason i dont want to go for the E8400/8500 is because i need this computer to last me 2-3 years without major upgrades. I'm thinking that in that time more programs will utilize extra threads and an improvement over the E8400 will be seen. I contemplated this for awhile and came to realize that a more future-proof computer lies with quad core!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old November 17, 2008, 06:15 PM
encorp's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,425

My System Specs

Default

More cores = better. I know everyone touts mhz and sure it'll make games run faster but we are now seeing games (Fallout 3, LFD) Take advantage of multiple cores.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in the immediately preceding post are those of encorp and do not reflect the views and/or opinions of family, friends, or anyone remotely associated with encorp unless explicitly stated. encorp does not make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any liability or responsibility for the quality, factuality or use of information in the immediately preceding post.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes