Same Price - Overclocking - Q6600 VS. Q9400

Get the q9400

And it's architecture is a little more efficient. The only problem is that its lower multiplier puts a greater demand on the motherboard.

Do you understand what jsc meant by his comment though?

The Q9's run a bit cooler but this one has less cache.

Also, the Q9400 runs a slightly higher multiplier and the FSB is also 1333 (333) vs the Q6600 which is 1066 (266).

It therefore follows that the Q6600 will likely be a bit easier to stretch the FSB on a given motherboard ... pushing it to 333 (1333) means your running at 3Ghz ... usually quite easy without any extra voltage.

The Q9400 may also overclock quite well but your starting at 333 on the FSB ... means you will need good RAM and a good motherboard to push it as far. A 400Mhz FSB will give you 3.2Ghz ... might be hard to get much further.

A 400 Mhz OC on a Q6600 would give you 3.6Ghz ... and many are sitting around there on a Q6600 ... usually with a decent watercooler to be safe as they are a bit hotter.

Getting a Q9400 to 3.6Ghz means a massive OC of around 450Mhz on the FSB ... good luck with that one ... Iv'e got one Corsair stick that will go there !!!

Good luck !!

Hope this helps!!

Q9400 8 X 1333 (333) = 2.66Ghz ... 6Mb Cache

http://processorfinder.intel.com/d [...] Spec=SLB6B

Q6600 9 X 1066 (266) = 2.4Ghz .... 8Mb Cache

http://processorfinder.intel.com/d [...] Spec=SLACR