thinking of upgrading - Page 2

Capt. Insane · 09-03-2007, 05:48 PM

No, I'm not sure, but that's how I read it. MT is the only one who can answer that.
However, in relation to AMD's dual physical processor board, is the Q6600 still the best way to go?

{OF}Blong · 09-03-2007, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChemicalWarrior

Ummm, you sure? Not how I read it... (As far as MT's question).

AMD's processor won't keep up most likely... I wouldn't be shocked if AMD is not around in another two or three years time at this current pace.

I read dual cpu so that would be 1 cpu just like chem thought. At least thats the way I read it as well. there is no s on cpu making it more than one cpu.

ChemicalWarrior · 09-03-2007, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capt. Insane

No, I'm not sure, but that's how I read it. MT is the only one who can answer that.
However, in relation to AMD's dual physical processor board, is the Q6600 still the best way to go?

Anything in Intel's product line is better than AMD's at this point unless we start talking sub $100 price points. I would steer clear of dual socket motherboards for a gaming system, the chipsets tend to not be designed for such applications.

Capt. Insane · 09-03-2007, 09:12 PM

Ok, thanks.
I've been doing some more research, mainly looking at benchmarks on Tom's Hardware - Computer Hardware News, Tests, Ratings and Reviews. I found some interesting results. Out of 33 tests, the Q6600 outperformed the E6750 by one. However, when I looked at things more pertinent to me and my computer uses, the E6750 greatly beat out the Q6600.
I'll share the ones I looked at in-depth (note all of these were done with Vista, so I don't know if that means anything). Q is the 6600, E is the 6750
Audio Encoding w/Itunes- Q 1:22 min E 1:14 min
Prey fps- Q 113.4 E 117.7
Quake fps- Q 110.0 E 117.8
UT2k4 fps- Q 92.9 E83.2
Supreme Commander fps- Q 49.5 E 46.6
Photoshop CS3 encoding- Q 2:02 min E 1:52

I realize I don't play any of these games at the moment, but they covered all sides well, I think. They have the most graphically intense game on the market (SC) and range down to one that's not as intense, UT2k4. And while I'm not using PS CS3, I do have CS2, and I can't imagine that making a difference. In looking at benchmarks like this, should I get the Q6600 because it beat out the E6750 overall, or should I get the E6750 because it beat out the Q6600 in applications I know I'll be using.

{OF}MillerTime · 09-03-2007, 09:20 PM

i had no specific cpu in mind. i thought i saw somewhere that duo performed better in gaming appz as oppossed to quads. but that would be for current and very new games. but as chem implied...i would most likely have my next upgrade for MANY years so quad might be the way for me.

i'm thinking maybe after the new year of going hog-wild for my last game rig. not that i'm done gaming, but maybe highend then will carry me through for quite awhile. even if i have to turn down some candy. since i onlyplay now at whatever max sweetness will deliver at least 60fps.

Capt. I would guess, and it's only a guess. but since duo came out, now there's quad, that more and more appz will be taking advantage of multiple cores. so in that respect...4 is better than 2 in the long term.

{OF}Blong · 09-03-2007, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capt. Insane

Ok, thanks.
I've been doing some more research, mainly looking at benchmarks on Tom's Hardware - Computer Hardware News, Tests, Ratings and Reviews. I found some interesting results. Out of 33 tests, the Q6600 outperformed the E6750 by one. However, when I looked at things more pertinent to me and my computer uses, the E6750 greatly beat out the Q6600.
I'll share the ones I looked at in-depth (note all of these were done with Vista, so I don't know if that means anything). Q is the 6600, E is the 6750
Audio Encoding w/Itunes- Q 1:22 min E 1:14 min
Prey fps- Q 113.4 E 117.7
Quake fps- Q 110.0 E 117.8
UT2k4 fps- Q 92.9 E83.2
Supreme Commander fps- Q 49.5 E 46.6
Photoshop CS3 encoding- Q 2:02 min E 1:52

I realize I don't play any of these games at the moment, but they covered all sides well, I think. They have the most graphically intense game on the market (SC) and range down to one that's not as intense, UT2k4. And while I'm not using PS CS3, I do have CS2, and I can't imagine that making a difference. In looking at benchmarks like this, should I get the Q6600 because it beat out the E6750 overall, or should I get the E6750 because it beat out the Q6600 in applications I know I'll be using.

1. last i knew toms hardware was unreliable
2. out of all the fps shown the e barely outperformed the q. I dont consider cs3 encoding of 10 seconds for somethign that takes 2 min that much of a performance boost. Now if your talking taking a 30 hr encode and dropping it down say 5 hours I can see that as being a good performance boost but not 10 minutes.

Capt. Insane · 09-04-2007, 12:51 AM

Makes sense what Blong and MT say. But my main concern is that I'm going to have to do a complete upgrade again in a year and have everything out of date. Last year I bought a 3800+ with 184-pin DDR RAM. Now everything is on DDR2, and my 3800+ seems slow in general. I've heard rumors of Intel's newest CPU that's in the pipeline, but don't really know much about it. I'm hoping that it would be compatible with the old boards, but I've heard that it'd have fewer pins since that means less power. So that's one of my concerns. The other is that the quads are going to come down massively in price sometime soon (few months to a year). If that's the case, I'd rather spend my money and get a better mobo and ram, and then later I could get a better quad core for cheaper.
I don't know. These things probably sound silly to all of you, but I'm just trying to let you know what's going through my head with this. I'm still waiting for some feedback in other places then I need to see how much this week's paycheck will be before buying anything. I might not even upgrade yet.
And as always, thank you all very very much for all of your help/input. It's greatly appreciated.

ChemicalWarrior · 09-04-2007, 01:26 AM

1.) The quad cores just came down in price massively in July. They received nearly a halving in price. You won't see that levels again till Penryn and then only on "old" Conroe based cores.

2.) If you want to buy new and update then grab DDR3... or wait you don't want to spend $400 for 2GB. Here's the thing, buy what makes sense on your upgrade path. When do you plan on redoing your computer again? Six months from now, one year, a year and a half, two? Your choice here makes a massive difference on what you want now. If you want to redo everything a year from now then try out the E6750, as of right now it might be better. But for me I tend to now update my CPU but once every year and a half or so. Therefore in that case I'd personally get a Q6600.

3.) Never trust Tom's, that's pretty simple. A same to hardware websites everywhere... They have massive charts, massive charts done across vast configurations. Their graphics card charts for example are a joke and hardly accurate.

4.) Penryn is Intel's next revision, still largely based on Conroe, you won't see big improvements but in select areas. After that is a few smaller revisions then Nehalem which is "the big one". Still a bit away though, earlest we'll see it is late Fall/Early winter 2008.

5.) Looking at what is newest is really rather pointless in any attempt to gauge what to buy. Honestly, this is why I have completely given up on large forums for information, they're useless. Information from people who put more value into e-penis size is not information at all.

{OF}Blong · 09-04-2007, 02:02 AM

OMG LOL chem said e-penis.

{OF}Malicious Assault · 09-04-2007, 08:02 AM

I will throw in my 2 cents here even though I usually by a system ready made. I usually buy the top of the market at the time. The last pc I bought lasted me 5 years, with only a memory upgrade, and it is still running 7 years now. I hope my current HP lasts that long as well. Chem has a good point about the Quads. The future games will be optimized for those processors. Capt, You need to buy the max you came afford. If you are worried about the extra $70 then go with what you planned originally and upgrade later to the new core. You could also wait a few months and save some and not only get the quad, but the memory as well. But the one thing to remember is that the day you buy your parts for you new box it is outdated...You will never be able to keep up with the changes unless you have Millions to spend and even then it would drive you nuts trying to keep up. What you buy today will run the coming games for 2-3 years. Upgrade when you cant play then games you want anymore, not because its the best out there, unless you want to