Which CPU?

[Darkangel]

Hey my Dad said he would build me a new computer for my birthday primarily for playing games with a little bit of media to. We were looking a CPU's and have to decide between a:

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.40GHz / 8MB Cache / 1066MHz FSB / Socket 775 / Processor With Fan

or a

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.00GHz / 4MB Cache / 1333MHz FSB / Socket 775 / Processor With Fan

Really all I want to know is if the Quad core is worth getting if I'm only going to be playing games and media or if I should just get the duel core?

 

[Warbie]

You might find this a handy read:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17775579

 

[Ravioli]

AMD Athlon 64bit X2 3.0ghz 6000+ is more than enough, plus its cheap

 

[Asus]

Right now the 3GHz dual core CPU will be faster in MOST games. There are a number of games that are starting to use 4 cores though. Also, Alan Wake will be doing some neat effects with Quad Core. Valve will be implementing particle effects which take advantage of quad cores as well.

For media, are you creating/editing the media or just watching it? A lot of encoding programs use multiple CPUs/Cores. Check up on the programs you will be using but it might be beneficial to go quad core for speedier times when processing video/audio.

 

[Darkangel]

You might find this a handy read:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17775579

Just read that and am starting to think that the Quad is better overclocked and the duel is better unoverclocked.

One of the arguments was that by the time games started to really use quads the Q6600 would suck. How long do you guys think it will take for Quads to start to be utilized?


EDIT: to answer Asus's question I like to do some photo and video editing but I'm not really a pro or anything.

 

[Warbie]

These chips all seem to be very good at overclocking. I'd probably go for the Q6600 if given the choice and give it a mild overclock (nothing that's risky).

 

[Darkangel]

Ya we've decided to get the Q6600 because it will probably be more future proof and plays better then the other one when overclocked.

PS: I've seen it overclocked to 4.0ghz

 

[Fliko]

Ya we've decided to get the Q6600 because it will probably be more future proof and plays better then the other one when overclocked.

PS: I've seen it overclocked to 4.0ghz

That's probably the way way better choice.
The lower FSB speed shouldn't make that much of a difference at this point.

 

[Dekstar]

If it's free to you, get a quad core .

 

[phantomdesign]

I'm getting the Q6600; it's $280 on newegg and is nearly top-of-the line performance.

http://www.newegg.com/product/product.asp?item=N82E16819115017
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=871&model2=882&chart=435

[1] For applications that utilize quad-core (more will as time progresses) you'll notice that performance of that chip is always around the #4 spot with a good lead on other processors. Most of the applications that don't utilize quad-core have no need for processors that powerful.

[2] The second reason to get it is Overclockability; people regularly report easily overclocking the processor to 3.3-3.5 GHz (compared to 2.4 GHz). With proper cooling systems I've seen a number of reports at 3.6-3.7, and a few even higher than that.

 

[Tyguy]

Would getting a quad core be ideal for Crysis? If so, at what speed is best?

Would an upgrade from pc3200 to pc6400 ram be a wise investment with my specs?

 

[Asus]

Would getting a quad core be ideal for Crysis? If so, at what speed is best?

Would an upgrade from pc3200 to pc6400 ram be a wise investment with my specs?

Quad core would help. We don't know the numbers though because we don't have the game. But aren't you using a Socket 939 system?

 

[Shamrock]

Would getting a quad core be ideal for Crysis? If so, at what speed is best?

Would an upgrade from pc3200 to pc6400 ram be a wise investment with my specs?

Yes. The faster the ram, the less chance of your computer bottlenecking.

2GB PC6400 >>>>>>>> 2GB PC3200

 

[Tyguy]

Quad core would help. We don't know the numbers though because we don't have the game. But aren't you using a Socket 939 system?

Yes, so im also looking at mobos. As you know I just got an 8800 for bioshock which did wonders, but upon playing the crysis beta, i definately need to upgrade. So i was thinking a quadcore, couple sticks of 2GB 6400, and a new mobo.

How much of a performance would I gain from 2 sticks of 3200 to 6400? (lets say with biochock)
Is getting 4 gigs still pointless?

 

[Asus]

According to Cevat Yerli, Crysis will have a 10-15% performance increase per thread running in 64-bit.
(I didn't quote the next sentence, which they extracted from his quote, because it doesn't make sense.)

 

[Warbie]

Crysis sounds stupidly demanding. There are people with 8800 gtx and overclocked C2Ds complainging about low frame rates.

 

[phantomdesign]

Yes, so im also looking at mobos. As you know I just got an 8800 for bioshock which did wonders, but upon playing the crysis beta, i definately need to upgrade. So i was thinking a quadcore, couple sticks of 2GB 6400, and a new mobo.

How much of a performance would I gain from 2 sticks of 3200 to 6400? (lets say with biochock)
Is getting 4 gigs still pointless?

Seems like you have a similar budget & similar hardware goals. I JUST built this system (below); that's after a LOT of research on benchmarks, OCing, reviews, etc.

http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishlist/PublicWishDetail.asp?WishListNumber=8040507

I'd recommend at least the CPU, Heatsink (unless you go liquid-cooling), Motherboard, and Memory.

I haven't OCed yet, but using that heatsink WITHOUT fans, during mediocre computer use (installing programs, downloading, setting up computer, etc) average core temperatures were only about 5 degrees fehrenheight (2-3 C) above the current room temperature (76-80 degrees).

 

[Tyguy]

Seems like you have a similar budget & similar hardware goals. I JUST built this system (below); that's after a LOT of research on benchmarks, OCing, reviews, etc.

http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishlist/PublicWishDetail.asp?WishListNumber=8040507

I'd recommend at least the CPU, Heatsink (unless you go liquid-cooling), Motherboard, and Memory.

I haven't OCed yet, but using that heatsink WITHOUT fans, during mediocre computer use (installing programs, downloading, setting up computer, etc) average core temperatures were only about 5 degrees fehrenheight (2-3 C) above the current room temperature (76-80 degrees).

How is the performance on the new rig?