Now that the Q6700 is basically the Q6600's old price, which would you go for? I'm thinking of upgrading to one of these soon, the Q9450 won't see a price drop for a long time I'm sure, and the 10x multi is attractive. If someone has a reason for me to get the Q6600 or Q9450 instead, please post. Even though this might not look like a factor, I'll most likely being ram limited at around 450FSB.

EDIT:
Forgot to mention, the newer 45nm chips also have a slower cache (but more of it to compensate)

I guess it depends on the speed you will be hoping for. Just about all q6600s are good for 3.6.

When you get a Q6700 you do have a better chance at 3.8 or higher with one.

No matter the choice you make on the q6x00 series, make sure to try and get an OEM processor if possible!!

It's all gonna be in the VID! (VID = Luck.)

--Lupi

q9450 is $299 at www.microcenter.com check it out

45nm runs much cooler and seems to oc better without an incrase to VID. I'm at 3.2 without a single tweak to any voltage. Can't say how good the Q6*00 is before increasing voltage maybe someone with experience can chime in for you on that one. 45nm also runs faster clock for clock than 65nm chips.

Q6600 seems to be a mixed bag atm and luck of the draw.

I recently just bought 2. I can get both to 3.2 without any issue. Getting them to 3.6 has been more challenging.

If I had it to do over again, I would probably get an OEM Q6700 or Q9450.

Then again, you can't really go wrong with the Q6600 OEM at $200.

I would let your cash flow/budget be the deciding factor.

If you don't mind spending the extra $100 (or $50) on the Q9450 (or Q6700), buy it.

Expand on the OEM comment...I haven't heard of this before.

Me either, Although I just bought two Q6600's

One is a L808 batch (OEM) and the other is a L804 batch (Retail).

The L808 is supposed to OC better and has a lower VID (1.225 vs 1.325).

Coincidence (OEM vs Retail)? I have no idea at this point.

He means that OEM models apparently has lower VIDs, and thus better OCing.

The Q6700 has dropped enough in price that for a person who is making a new build and doesn't have a lot of money, its a great choice. The Q9450 has been a bit disappointing from what I've seen so far, at least in the overclocking arena. The Q9550 beats is soundly, but cost a bunch more. For budget builders, I think the Q6700 is a great buy right now.

True indeed, but is that extra multiplier really necessary? Most motherboards can do 450Mhz these days, and 450 x 9 = 4050Mhz, which I'm assuming not many people do. Thus, save a little and go for the Q6600.

However, there is OCing to consider. Does the Q6700 OC better than the Q6600? According to Lupi, he said the Q6700 has a better chance at 3.8GHz, so it all boils down the the OP.

It probably has a better chance, unless he gets a low VID on the q6600.

Right, except I would be upgrading my current E6300 (keep that in mind). The Q9xxx series I'm sure will eventually be the same value items as the Q6xxx series, but that will be later than my time frame (before September hopefully :S)

This is true, but for 24/7 operation (and having 2 sticks of budget ram that need 2.1v for >800MHz), I would like to leave the FSB around 400 or less (It's 400 right now ). For a realistic number I'm trying to pull off, I would like about 3.6-3.8GHz. Keep in mind I do have a TRUE, and some sexy arse cooling in general ;].

P.S. If anyone has any advice on where to fine low VID CPUs, please do share

The VID is the "stock" vCore for each chip, and it varies from chip to chip based on Intel's testing procedures. The VID will tell the motherboard: "This is the voltage I require at stock speeds when the VCore setting is on 'Auto' for proper operation." Nothing more. It is said that a lower VID value will yield better overclocks, but nothing's been conclusively proven.

If anyone can share ANYWHERE that lower VID=more oc, I'd love to see it..... but from where I stand it all is just a tube made myth.

i got my q6700 to 3.2ghz with no voltage increases whatsoever......and this was on one of the first versions when it first came out....still 0 stepping.....

Well... reading ALL of the OCing threads/boards, it seems fairly apparent that there is (at the very least) a loose correlation between the documented VID and the ability to OC a CPU.

A low VID doesn't guarantee 3.6, 3.8, 4.1, etc. because there are many other factors that come into play as well? RAM, MB, Cooling, etc...