e6400 to q6600 or q9400

[Xarick]

I can get a q6600 for $100 used or I could spend $160 and get a q9400.
What would be the better upgrade for my system:
p5q se
6 gigs dd2
E6400@3.2 on artic cooling freezer pro
8800gts 320 .

 

[Markfw]

Personally, I would alwasy go for the newer tech.

Q9400.

 

[aclim]

yea, i was thinking about throwing a quad in my system also to hold me until 8 core procs. I am also wondering between q6600 or q9400

 

[VirtualLarry]

Q6600 is a real workhorse, and it's hard to go wrong with that CPU, but a Q9400 would overclock higher, and use less power. So if your board supports it, I would go with the Q9400, probably. Although, value for money would favor the $100 chip rather than the $160 chip.

 

[amenx]

But which mobo are you going to use? If its one of the older types that was around when the e6400 came out (965, 975 and some P35's), it may not work well with the 45nm quads.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Q6600 is a real workhorse, and it's hard to go wrong with that CPU, but a Q9400 would overclock higher, and use less power. So if your board supports it, I would go with the Q9400, probably. Although, value for money would favor the $100 chip rather than the $160 chip.

the Q9400's multiplier might actually keep it from clocking as high as a Q6600, however performance per watt will be better and depending on how long he decides to run on the quad it might end up being the better overall option through and through

 

[Xarick]

p45 mobo. Asus p5Q se

 

[n7]

I'd say the Q6600 is the better deal here actually.

More cache (8 MB vs. 6 MB), & you have a 9x multi instead of 8x, which will become important for your mobo when OCing.

I doubt you'll be able to get a very high FSB stable on that board with a quad, hence why having the 9x of the Q6600 might come in very handy.

I don't think the Q9400 is worth the extra $60 in this situation.

 

[RussianSensation]

Q6600. You will be able to overclock this processor to the maximum since it has a low FSB of 266 and a high multiplier of 9x.

Q6600 @ 3.4-3.6 is no slouch, mostly keeping pace with Core i5 750 at stock speeds:
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...rks-75-percent-boost-for-quad-cores/Practice/

In the benchmark above, even E8400 @ 3.6ghz cannot keep up with a stock Q6600.

Sell your videocard for $30 or so add the $60 savings from Q9400 towards a new videocard. Find a used GTX 260 or 4870 and you are good to go until full system overhaul.

From personal experience of running Q6600 @ 3.4ghz G0 stepping on Tuniq Tower, I was getting about 52-56*C at full load. Now I am getting 68-71*C on Megahalems with Core i7 860. I realize it's comparing apples and oranges here, but anyone trying to argue that 65nm Q6600 was a hot chip hasn't overclocked a Core i7!

However, if you do intend to keep your system for quite a bit longer than a year, then the Q9400 has a hidden advantage: it supports SSE4.1 instructions that will be more important a little later, when software applications using these instructions become numerous enough.

 

[EarthBoy]

No way would I pay $60 more for Q9400 over Q6600. It is at most a 10-15% difference.

 

[RussianSensation]

No way would I pay $60 more for Q9400 over Q6600. It is at most a 10-15% difference.

Ya when both are overclocked to 3.5+ ghz, the difference is small:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2quad-q9300_8.html#sect1

The thing is you'd need 450 FSB x 8 multi to crack 3.6ghz on the Q9400. So I would probably inquire users with his board if 450 FSB is possible on a quad on that board.

Plus that videocard can be sold and the savings added to get a faster card.

 

[error8]

I don't know, but I for one, think that Q6600 was the best CPU ever made. It came out in 2007 and 3 years later it just became even a better performer. It's exactly like the wine, the more time passes the tastier it gets. I don't remember a CPU that resisted so long, being able to stand in the performance league, after 3 years of its release.

It's very resilient, you can't brake it, you can't burn it and it overclocks like crazy, without killing the motherboard or ram. It holds any videocard from the last generation, once you crank up its clock, in any resolution or game.
So, yes, I vote for Q6600, just because you'll get it cheaper and frankly it doesn't matter that it's used, because nothing will bring it down.