I have a GA-P35-DS3L, I want to OC to 3.2, I want to be future proof...
 
Should I get Q6600 or Q9450....
 
How much more is Q9450 future proof than Q6600? 2 years from now...will there be a real difference?

I was in a similar situation. I've got the GA-EP35-DS3R MB and in the end have decided to go for the Q9450. Not because I thought it would be more future proof. More because I wanted the 45nm processor.
 
For what I use my PC for it should last me 2 years (at least). I upgraded from a P4 3.0Ghz which has lasted me over three years. I can see good life in the current range of processors. There's not a lot out there that's really pushing them at the moment.

I personally would go for a G0 Q6600 and overclock it. Your Gigabyte board has a lot of potential.

The Q6600 does 3.0-3.3GHz on a P35 easily. I didn't even have to raise the stock voltages on mine.
The Q9450 requires a FSB of 400MHz for 3.2GHz. That's still easy on a P35 but it requires you to also increase your FSB and (G)MCH voltages a bit.
 
I'd go for the Q6600 because it's 50% cheaper here.

I'd say the Q6600, unless the cost delta is truly irrelevant to ya.  Let's keep this real folks.  In a year there's gonna be a new platform out there and no matter what kind of brainwashing we try to do to you, you're gonna like want that new platform.  You may not be in a position to get it, but you're gonna likely want it.
 
The Q9450's performance lead over the Q6600 does not just, IMO, the $100 difference.  So that's $100 you could save towards the above mentioned Nehalem while getting ~nearly the same performance via overclock.   Now, if you have enough disposable cash that the $100 difference between the two, is not important, then get the faster processor today.
 
My .02 cents.

+1    I have a Q6600 on a DS3L @ 3.4ghz.  I have taken up to 3.6ghz but the performance increase wasn't worth the heat and NB wear and tear.  It does everything and more than any apps have required when at 3.2ghz so 3.2 -3.4 is more than plenty and should be until Nehalem is out.

Faced with this choice, I chose the Q9450 for the 45nm.  I figured I'd be kicking myself in a few months for choosing older tech, even if there would be no notable performance difference either way.  As it is, the urge to upgrade and tweak is significantly abated, or is limited to cheaper stuff like another fan in my case, more RAM, or maybe another drive, but nothing expensive.

Q9300 will run 3.5 on stock fan.  Its a better overclocker than the Q6600 and runs cooler.
 
For those of you who are going to say Im wrong.  Read Maximum PC's June 2008 Page 16  Deathmatch "Q6600 VS. Q9300".  Q9300 wins hands down in overclocking and performance.

Q9300 needs 466MHz FSB to get there (3.5GHz). That on a DS3L is pure luck. And probably not very easy on the northbridge. But yes Q9300 will run that with a stock fan.

Eyes DFI LP P35 in case...   Looks at Q66 already in there....   Looks at Q9300.  
 
 
This could be bad.

Well Q9300 easily reaches 3.5 on stock fan using 790i Ultra.  Maximum pc June 2008 page 16.  Q9300vsQ6600.

oka I bought the Q6600 G0 from Microcenter for $199...I guess I need 356x9 to get 3.2 on it...seems easy.
 
My other concern/question:
 
Armor TT (w/ 250cm side fan) $142 ($120 + $20 shipping) vs. Antec 1200 for $188 ($179 + $9 tax) - which would you get? Antec 1200 worth the $46 premium? Also...how would a Cosmos 1000 ($220) factor in this? I am looking for the best Full Tower $100-$200....got a better case in mind?

Get a antec 900, its a great case, plenty of room, tons of cooling. Also its antec, they make great products they stand by, and as a additional incentive, they come with 3 120mm fans and 1 240mm fan.

I think it depends on what you're going to be doing.  If it's graphic design and video work then the additional instruction set inside the Q9450 gives it a huge boost over the Q6600.  If it's general business type applications then the Q6600 is a great bargain.  If it's gaming then you can probably go with a faster dual core.

He already bought it Moby.

yea I already got the Q6600..i dont video edit nor do graphic design...i just game and use it for normal stuff.
 
However, Antec 1200 vs. TT Armor (w/ 250cm side fan)....is still running in my head...$46 more for Antec 1200
 
I have 3 HDs..and probably will get another one...so I think a full tower is kinda needed now. They all seem to be like $120+ for good ones.

I think I remember reading that Maximum PC article while at the doctor's office the other week.
 
I think I also remember laughing at.  

 
??? ahhh what?

I don't really remember the article, I rarely put much stock in pc mags. They made it sound like the Q9300 was the king of all and the Q6600 should bow at its feet. The differences are really negligible when considering the price difference. The Q9300 is faster mhz for mhz by about 100, and it will run cooler because of the 45nm, but I've also heard from over at EOC that they don't handle voltages as well as the 65nm.
 
Knuckle-down, I don't see any reason to get a Q9300 over a Q6600, especially when you throw in the 2mb less L2 and .5-style multiplier.

For the price of a Q9300 you can get a Q6600 and the XIGMATEK HDT-S1283. That cooler can take your Q6600 to 4GHz. Now try finding a motherboard that will take a Q9300 to 4GHz.
 
I took my friends Q9300 to 3.5GHz on stock voltage on a Rampage Formula.
The problem is the chip crapped out on us at 474MHz. 473MHz @ VID stable as a rock looping prime95 and 3dmark. 474-533MHz no post, nothing, not even a beep. Just a clear CMOS to restart. It will do 3.5GHz, maybe even on a stock cooler (I've seen it run at stock around 70°C on a stock cooler (Prime95 on all 4 cores and CoreTemp)) so I wouldn't try that but that's as high as it will go.
 
@qmalik
Between the TT Armor and the Twelve Hundred there is no decision to make. The TT Armor can go hide in a corner and cry. It has nothing on the Twelve Hundred, it's ugly and it's dated. The Twelve Hundred is no beauty queen either but at least it's fresh and performs like such a case should (review on hexus.net compared temperatures to a Cosmos).