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

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old April 2, 2008, 09:38 PM
Infiniti's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,388

My System Specs

Default E8400 vs. Q6600

Which is better? E8400 vs. Q6600. Also, which one would get a better clock when running on water?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2008, 11:51 AM
Spaceman-Spiff's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: burnaby.bc.ca
Posts: 355
Default

The E8400 has higher clock speed and FSB. For games and applications that fully utilizes the quad core, The Q6600 will be faster. For others that only support Dual Core or less, the E8400 will be faster. If you're doing a lot of multitasking, perhaps you will benefit more with the quad.

I think not a lot of games out there really support multicore up to that level. Probably only newer big title games.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2008, 12:39 PM
thenewguy001's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 844
Default

I bet by 2009 most new games will support quad core. When that happens, 4 x 2.4GHz cores will be better than 2 x 3GHz cores. Plus, Q6600 has more cache. I'm also pretty sure that new games that I care about like Fallout 3 and Starcraft 2 will support quad core.

There are few games out there right now that support quads though. Crysis, Source Engine (Half Life 2), World in Conflict, Dirt, are the few that I know of. Games based off the Unreal 3 engine such as bioshock also benefit slightly from quads.

Last edited by thenewguy001; April 3, 2008 at 12:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2008, 01:34 PM
Spaceman-Spiff's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: burnaby.bc.ca
Posts: 355
Default

It's not easy to program in multithread. Right now I think the best approach so far was done by Valve's Source Engine. However, it took them great effort to produce such result. If you're interested to read more on it, it's been featured on a few websites:
- Valve goes multicore: Page 1
- bit-tech.net | Multi-core in the Source Engine
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2008, 02:20 PM
Scratch's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 373

My System Specs

Default

while this is true that more games are "making use" of multicore threading, the truth is NO game has yet been developed to truly run on 2 or more cores.
I remember reading about 1 game that is in development stages that is going to actually use multicore processing as its base operating structure however I cannot remember what game it is nor have I heard anything else lately about the development.
Apparently as was written by Gabe Newell ( AnandTech News: Valve's Gabe Newell talks about multi-core game development ) writing programming for SMP is an inherently difficult process so the difference between "making use" and actually being an SMP operational game are two different things
When we have a game that actually uses full core functionality and DX10 capabilities it will revolutionize game development and the gaming pc will pwn once more
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2008, 02:25 PM
Babrbarossa's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New Brunswick
Posts: 3,673

My System Specs

Default

Thanks for the link!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2008, 03:40 PM
3.0charlie's Avatar
3.0 "I kill SR2's" Charlie
F@H
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Laval, QC
Posts: 9,627

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infiniti View Post
Which is better? E8400 vs. Q6600. Also, which one would get a better clock when running on water?
I won't answer which one is better, I'm still juggling this one myself. But for clocks under water, I had both with the same wc setup. The Quad did 3.8Ghz while the E8400 did 4.3GHz - both stable for folding.
__________________
Hydro-Quebec is salivating...
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2008, 03:45 PM
thenewguy001's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 844
Default

I think that the general consensus is that in the long run, ie.if you plan on keeping your CPU for as long as you can, a quad is a better investment. However, if you have the cash to buy new components as soon as they become affordable in the sub $300 range and then sell your old components, then benchmarks show the E8400 as the better overall performer right at the moment.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes