Intel E6750 VS Intel Q6600

[Computergeek]

Hello,

I have both of these processors. Right now in my gaming rig i have the Q6600 but i wanted your guys opinion on what proc is better for gaming. Would the Q6600 be better served on my other rig were i multi-task more often? I think i was getting better performance in games with my E6750 am i crazy?

Thanks Compgeek

[enaberif]

e6750 is better.

quad doesn't give any benefits to games.

[Computergeek]

seriously...so i should put my 6750 back in....i feel like i wasted my money

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by Computergeek

seriously...so i should put my 6750 back in....i feel like i wasted my money

I don't know how often I must have this conversation but for the most part a quad is 90% unused in most computers these days.

[Computergeek]

Thanks for the info

[zlojack]

Well, I wouldn't necessarily say the E6750 is "better", Enaberif. If the CPU's were clocked the same, they would be equal...ie. you wouldn't see any extra benefit in gaming with the quad.

Of course, if you can get a higher clock out of the dual, then that's the way to go for gaming.

[magictorch]

I'm not sure you wasted your money on the quad as future games may use them more efficiently plus you said you use multiple apps. As stated, currently games respond better to faster cores rather than 2 vs 4.

You should aim for 3.2 and over to get the best frames out of a 4870.

3.6-3.8 is very achievable on an aftermarket air-cooler with an E6750, you'd need water-cooling to do that with a quad.

Just installed a loop on my brothers QX6700 and it really needs that watercooling to get past 3.2. Huge differences in temperature between the E6750 at a similiar OC.

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by magictorch

I'm not sure you wasted your money on the quad as future games may use them more efficiently plus you said you use multiple apps. As stated, currently games respond better to faster cores rather than 2 vs 4.

You should aim for 3.2 and over to get the best frames out of a 4870.

3.6-3.8 is very achievable on an aftermarket air-cooler with an E6750, you'd need water-cooling to do that with a quad.

Just installed a loop on my brothers QX6700 and it really needs that watercooling to get past 3.2. Huge differences in temperature between the E6750 at a similiar OC.

Games are more GPU bound than they are CPU bound which is why from 3.0ghz on a C2D to 4.0ghz you will see very little difference in FPS.

You can't talk about future in computers because once nehalem comes out and if it proves itself well the quads like the 6600 will become obsolete for the new stuff.

[magictorch]

Yes thats true, I see a big difference up to around 3.2 then it levels off with only marginal gains to 3.6-3.8.

So you think game developers wll leapfrog the current quads in favor of nehalem..glad I didnt buy a quad then

Originally Posted by enaberif

Games are more GPU bound than they are CPU bound which is why from 3.0ghz on a C2D to 4.0ghz you will see very little difference in FPS.

You can't talk about future in computers because once nehalem comes out and if it proves itself well the quads like the 6600 will become obsolete for the new stuff.

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by magictorch

Yes thats true, I see a big difference up to around 3.2 then it levels off with only marginal gains to 3.6-3.8.

So you think game developers wll leapfrog the current quads in favor of nehalem..glad I didnt buy a quad then

I think game developers will wait for intel to stabilize before making ANY real big jumps in the gaming industry.

Even at the point we are at now games don't take full advantage of dual cores.