PDA

View Full Version : CPU upgrade advice needed


stefan9
05-15-08, 11:34 AM
Hi guys. This has probably been asked before but I need to ask it again.

I am planning to upgrade my cpu in July.

My choices are the e8400 or q6600. Price range is about the same give or take R100.

I don't think the e8500 is worth the extra R800 for 0.16ghz

Also the mobo doesn't support the newer quads so that's a no go.

Which one would be the better option. Bare in mind this pc is mostly used for rpg gaming with the odd bit of overclocking. Some rts and fps gaming but mostly rpgs.

ragejg
05-15-08, 11:44 AM
Whenever/if ever you can, go quad. If you can't go quad, pick cache size over clock speed. RTS games are damn heavy on cpu and cache resources, and all newer and upcoming RTS games aree optimized or will be optimized soon to take advantage of as many cores as possible.

:)

styles-T
05-15-08, 02:05 PM
get the e8400 its better for gaming.

the quad core is only better for encoding decoding etc. games dont use 4 cores so its useless as of now...

Dazz
05-15-08, 04:08 PM
I have been taring my hair out as to what to do myself, i used to play alot of Supreme commander but anything more then 1 an AI bring the game to a crawl been thinking of 4 CPU's to get either the E8400 (£130) the Q6600 G0 (£135) the Q9300 (£170) or the Q9450 (£230) there has been mixed reports on FSB overclock with my current ASUS P5N-D as much as SSE4 provides a boost in content with support i am wondering if the E8400 @ 4GHz will be faster then say a Q6600 @ 3.6GHz in Supreme Commander. I can reach 100% CPU useage with my E4300 @ 3.2GHz so i know thats my limiting factor in my System. The Q9300 & Q9450 is at the back of my mind as i am not sure if i can get the FSB high enough for the Q9450 due ot it's low multiplier. Another CPU i was intrested in was the E7200 also but mixed bags on overclocking there as some people can hit 4GHz others only 3.5GHz, the FSB does not always overclock as high.

ragejg
05-15-08, 04:10 PM
games dont use 4 cores so its useless as of now...

Q:
What happens when a new Command and Conquer or Civilization game comes out?

A:
It'll utilize all possible cores.

styles-T
05-15-08, 05:32 PM
Q:
What happens when a new Command and Conquer or Civilization game comes out?

A:
It'll utilize all possible cores.

OK a few Games. But what about the 100's of games that are already in place that don't use 4 quads. Don't get me wrong I know the future is 4 Quads but thats way down the road. I still think the E8400 is a better choice for what he wants and will be fine for the next year or so if money is tight for him. Look at the benchmarks and comparisons on the net the Q6600 loses.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000942.html

David power
05-15-08, 05:41 PM
OK a few Games. But what about the 100's of games that are already in place that don't use 4 quads. Don't get me wrong I know the future is 4 Quads but thats way down the road. I still think the E8400 is a better choice for what he wants and will be fine for the next year or so if money is tight for him. Look at the benchmarks and comparisons on the net the Q6600 loses.

Developers didnít decide to write 2 threads of code all of a sudden, they decided to write code that could take advantage of as many cores that were available.

xbox360 = 3 cores playstation 3 = 8 cores. even the console games are being developed this way.

styles-T
05-15-08, 05:58 PM
Developers didnít decide to write 2 threads of code all of a sudden, they decided to write code that could take advantage of as many cores that were available.

xbox360 = 3 cores playstation 3 = 8 cores. even the console games are being developed this way.

Your right. I should have worded it differently. Code is written to take advantage of as many cores possible.

I still don't see an advantage from a faster Core 2 than a slower Quad Core, but I guess only time will tell and prove me wrong.

Blacklash
05-15-08, 06:45 PM
I'd still buy my Q6600 if I had it to do over again. They do 3.0GHz on stock voltage with the stock cooler with zero problems. I do things other than game though, so quad is more viable for me. If you're getting a chip to keep a while go quad because more games will take advantage of it in the future. The E8400 will likely clock higher when we are talking max, and both will do 3.6GHz with little problems. I think a Q6600 @ 3.0-3.6GHz is plenty of support for any card on the market. On P35 mine will do 3.6GHz by boosting the vcore alone. I don't need to touch another voltage setting on the board.

I think you'd be happy with either and I feel the quad is a better long term choice.

Running OC data collection from users @ XS that includes the Q6600 G-0-
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2410961&postcount=2

If you do deal with a lot of media apps you may want to look @ a Q9450. At the same clock in certain applications Yorkfield quads are 20 to almost 30% faster-

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2extreme-qx9650_11.html#sect1

In games @ 1024x it is less than 1% to +7%-

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2extreme-qx9650_11.html#sect0

Below is an example of what things will look like when more games use Quad like LP-
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/507/lp2ud0.png

BCKator
05-15-08, 07:16 PM
FWIW,I'm planning on going dual 8500 for my next system. The applications that I care about (gaming) today work better on a faster dual than quad. If I were doing video work or knew I had applications that utilized quad, I'd go that way. I just don't see that yet for what I want to do. I also like the lower power (less heat) of dual vs quad.

v3rninater
05-15-08, 09:15 PM
get the e8400 its better for gaming.

the quad core is only better for encoding decoding etc. games dont use 4 cores so its useless as of now...

I'll bet in one year you will regret saying that, if not less then. Quad would be the way to go for future reference. Games will and are using quads now even so 4 is better then 2 logic says.

CaptNKILL
05-15-08, 09:27 PM
I'll bet in one year you will regret saying that, if not less then. Quad would be the way to go for future reference. Games will and are using quads now even so 4 is better then 2 logic says.
People said this last year and I think the demand for dual cores has actually increased since then.

Its really looking like we're going to see more GPU accelerated physics than quad core optimized games.

No doubt, more cores is better, but you also get more heat, less overclocking head room, more power consumption and higher cost.

Its really hard to beat a CPU that costs $200 and can easily hit 4Ghz for gaming price vs. performance.

Maybe next year things will be different, but I think we're more likely to see more CPU load shifted to the GPU than a huge increase in quad core support.

stefan9
05-16-08, 04:32 AM
I'd still buy my Q6600 if I had it to do over again. They do 3.0GHz on stock voltage with the stock cooler with zero problems. I do things other than game though, so quad is more viable for me. If you're getting a chip to keep a while go quad because more games will take advantage of it in the future. The E8400 will likely clock higher when we are talking max, and both will do 3.6GHz with little problems. I think a Q6600 @ 3.0-3.6GHz is plenty of support for any card on the market. On P35 mine will do 3.6GHz by boosting the vcore alone. I don't need to touch another voltage setting on the board.

I think you'd be happy with either and I feel the quad is a better long term choice.

Running OC data collection from users @ XS that includes the Q6600 G-0-
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2410961&postcount=2

If you do deal with a lot of media apps you may want to look @ a Q9450. At the same clock in certain applications Yorkfield quads are 20 to almost 30% faster-

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2extreme-qx9650_11.html#sect1

In games @ 1024x it is less than 1% to +7%-

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2extreme-qx9650_11.html#sect0

Below is an example of what things will look like when more games use Quad like LP-
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/507/lp2ud0.png

Q9450 is not an option. The nforce 680i chipset doesn't support the Q9xxx quads only the 8xxx dual cores.

By media applications you mean video decoding and such?? Only media apps I uses is winamp and vlc. Don't really need quadcore for anything like playing a video or a mp3.

I will probably only be keeping the cpu till ddr3 becomes affordable since that's when I will be getting a new mobo so I don't see this as a really long term cpu investment.

Gorion
05-16-08, 09:55 AM
I definately do not regret going quad :D Most games I'm running right now utilize all 4 cores.

But that being said a good dual core will run anything you throw at it (game wise) right now and in teh forseeable future. So it is still a very viable option to get a higher clocking dual core and be very happy.

Or you can spend the bucks and get a quad that does 4Ghz easy. :p