Santa Clara (CA) – Intel’s not-so-secret price cut has been officially announced. The company slashed prices of its entry-level quad-core processors by 50% and also released six new processors in the Core 2 Extreme, Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo lines. The Read more
Alienware said it "will" launch Intel's second quad-core desktop processor, the 2.4 GHz Core 2 Quad Q6600, on its Area-51 7500 desktop system. Read more
Intel will launch a pricing campaign in the second quarter of 2007, with the price for the Core 2 Quad Q6600 processor falling to $530, according to industry sources. Read more
Chicago (IL) – Eurocom has begun offering its heavy-weight Phantom mobile workstations with Intel’s Core 2 Quad processors. If performance is the priority in a mobile computer, then there is a new option from Eurocom. The company’s D900C Phantom-X workst Read more
Three dramatically different builds face off in show of performance, defining the real value of each. Our mainstream system is designed to meet the needs of most users. Who should spend more and who can live with less? Read more
On this, the second to last day of our System Builder Marathon series, we add a $500 gaming PC to the mix. It's not going to be as quick as our other two builds, but we think Paul was able to get some serious value from this thing. Read more
We're following up yesterday's $4,500 behemoth with a more affordable $1,500 mid-range build. Let's see what sort of performance (and overclocking headroom) you can get when you spend one third of the money. Read more
This month's System Builder Marathon spreads the system prices out even further to $4,500, $1,500, and $500. Is today’s $4,500 system really worth three times as much as an upper-mainstream performance machine? Read more
| Bottom | |
|---|---|
| Author |
Thread : Q6600 VS Q6700
|
|
Profile: journeyman
More Information
|
just out of curiosity, which one i better? the Q6600 has a stock of 2.4 ghz and the Q6700 has a stock of 2.66ghz, i planning to OC and im a seriose gamer, which one do i chose? O.o |
|
Related Product
|
|
Profile: Forum Fixture
More Information
|
--------------- Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB + 1.5TB hdds, 850watt psu |
|
Master-de-bater
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information
|
To expand on what dagger has said, if you want to achieve a high OC for the cpu, yet your motherboard can not OC so high, the Q6700 will be worth the extra $50 for that extra multiplier. --------------- "Nvidia, the Way It's Meant to be *Lesbian Lover Club* - founder Assman |
|
Profile: addict
More Information
|
|
|
Profile: journeyman
More Information
|
i see what your saying, i was plannin on getting the x38/x48 MB so...but does that mean the Q6700 will be lways .26 ghz faster? |
|
Master-de-bater
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information
|
If you're getting the x38/x48, then the Q6600 is quite fine. You won't achieve anything faster with the Q6700. --------------- "Nvidia, the Way It's Meant to be *Lesbian Lover Club* - founder Assman |
|
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information
|
|
|
Profile: Forum Fixture
More Information
|
--------------- Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB + 1.5TB hdds, 850watt psu |
|
Noob? Currently on Sabbatical!
Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information
|
The Q6700 will have a better chance at 3.8 stable and a bit higher depending on its VID. If 3.6 is acceptable, go for the q6600, they all pretty much reach that with out to much hassle. As long as you dont have a 780i for its VDroop, and a 680/650i for its lack of q6x00 series Over clocking percentage! So if you wanted to get a 15% shot at 3.8 or a lil more, get a q6700. If 3.6 is fine, ( and maybe a 5 % chance at a super low VID like mine!) Just get a q6600. Thats about all you need. windows even loses its ability to test a quad at 3.6 or higher. Crysis uses one core at max, then two or the three at like 10-15% sooo.... need much more than that? --Lupi Message edited by Lupiron on 05-05-2008 at 05:08:22 AM |
|
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information
|
|
|
Profile: addict
More Information
|
If you can afford the 6700, it would be a bit easier to overclock and if not it has a slightly better stock speed. |
|
Profile: journeyman
More Information
|
woulden 3.6 ghz for the Q6600 be 3.8 ghz for the Q6700? since the Q6700 has a higher stock speed wont it mean itl reach higher speed with less hassle? or, will it run at same speeds with the same hassle, for exp. say the Q6600 is at 3.6 ghz and so it the Q6700, will they run, and produce the same amount of heat? or maybe the Q6700 will produce less heat because it took less to reach that speed?
|
|
Noob? Currently on Sabbatical!
Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information
|
Well, you'd think so, huh? But it doesnt seem to work that way. It appears that between 3.6 and 3.8 you are reaching the chips design limitations without exceptional cooling. I have tested personally 10 or so q6600 and q6700s. A high VID q6700 cant reach 3.8 within intel specs. I have a SINGLE low VID q6700. 1.2375 that can get stable at 3.8. I have a SINGLE q6600 that could PROLLY reach 3.8 stable. A 1.2000 Which is the lowest VID out of anyone so far. So if I cant do it... You are welcome to try. Think of it this way, a q6700 is a q6600 with a 10 multiplier. Thats all. I am sure it passed something at intels shop that got them to set its clock at 2.66 and not 2.4... I hope. But from what I have seen, they are all the same. So as I said, if you want more than a 5% chance, get a q6700, because if its VID is under 1.2500 you may hit 3.8. ALL the chips will reach 3.6ish. Vid will determine the rest. (Oh, and getting 3.8 stable in prime is no easy task! Its about 25 bios VCore notches to gain that extra 200 Mhz. It takes like half that to get 3.6 stable! So that first 1Ghz is free. Then your VID comes into play after that, and how easily you can OC farther depends on where your voltage started!) Example. My 1.2000 VID q 6600 gets 20 Bios VCore notches MORE within Intel Specs over my 1.3000 VID q 6600. My 1.2000 is stable at 3.6 @ under 1.3000 loaded. Add that up, my friend. So as the VID is raised, and the accompanying VCore that's required for a higher VID comes into play, it AUTOMATICALLY required more VCore voltage to become stable. Appears that it needs .0500 or more EXTRA to become stable. Thats yer High VID syndrome and chip limitations coming into play! And then the more voltage you add, the less efficient that voltage becomes, and the more that's dissipated as heat.. if you can dissipate that much! To sum it up. As you add voltage you need more voltage. The higher the VID starting level determines how long it is before you see that High VID syndrome. The more voltage you use, the more that escapes as heat, as well as causes more heat when you use processor power. Heat means your chip becomes less efficient along with the voltage.. and you have a weird set of circumstances doing weird things and poof! 3.6! And somewhere between 3.5-3.8 there is what we will call High VID syndrome, caused by the chips limits. As it reaches upper speeds, it looks to me like there is a limit to where it will go. 3.6-3.8 Anything after that is good luck and good cooling! Thats not mentioning that I mean Prime stable. You can run a chip higher and not see any errors at all, because you dont get no where near the drain from daily use that you get from artificial testing like Prime 95s small ffts!! Let me know how you do, if you wanna try it for your self. If you wanna see the info, search for my VID threads. --Lupi Message edited by Lupiron on 05-06-2008 at 12:42:50 AM |
|
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information
|
|
