Difference between OC'd Q6600 and stock Q6700, etc...

[Seaward]

I have just found myself a new $$$$ hobby. I am in the process of building a new gaming system and I am at the point where it's time to buy the CPU. I was wondering if an OC'd Q6600 to say 3.2 GHZ is faster than a stock Q6700. Is the the Q6600 and the 6700 basically the same chip just clocked differently or is there more to the chip it self that makes a difference?

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by Seaward

I have just found myself a new $$$$ hobby. I am in the process of building a new gaming system and I am at the point where it's time to buy the CPU. I was wondering if an OC'd Q6600 to say 3.2 GHZ is faster than a stock Q6700. Is the the Q6600 and the 6700 basically the same chip just clocked differently or is there more to the chip it self that makes a difference?

just clocks.

[DaBruuzer]

I have the Q6700, and it is basically the same CPU with different clocks. However, my multiplier runs stock at 10x, and I believe the Q6600 is at 9x. Not sure what difference that makes in the end, though.

[Seaward]

at what point or chip, starting from the Q6600, does it not become clocking as the difference and the chip itself? Is it once the first number changes (ie Q6600, Q6700, Q9300 etc..) and once it goes from 65nm to 45nm?

[DaBruuzer]

Originally Posted by Seaward

at what point or chip, starting from the Q6600, does it not become clocking as the difference and the chip itself? Is it once the first number changes (ie Q6600, Q6700, Q9300 etc..) and once it goes from 65nm to 45nm?

Well, the Q6600 and Q6700 are the only mainstream (read NOT Xeon) quad-core processors from Intel at the moment, besides their "extreme" QX-series (basically the same CPUs, clocked higher and with unlocked multipliers, I believe). Their 45nm quad-cores have been delayed again, but should be out in the near future, and are the Q9XXX-series.