Did i get a good Q6600?

[KillrBuckeye]

okay i'm close to switching back to my e8400.

my q6600 is struggling to stabilize at 3.7 ghz and anything slower than that is just poop for games.

unless you can get your q6600 at 3.8ghz, the e8400 at 4ghz or higher murders the q6600 in gaming.

q6600 is like a truck, handles a lot of load and stress, but is slow as fux0ring sh1z!!!

Look, you're entitled to your opinion, but I completely disagree, and I think you're spreading false information to novices. The Q6600, even at stock speeds, is more than anyone needs for gaming. Most of us are playing at 1680x1050 or higher resolutions, and with medium or high detail settings almost all games will be limited by the video card. Even if you have 2 high end cards running SLI/Crossfire, the CPU bottleneck is meaningless because I guarantee framerates will be more than playable with a stock-clocked Q6600.

If all you care about is your benchmark scores, then that's fine. Go ahead and switch to an E8400. The real-world benefit is non-existent.

 

[cpt>hollywood]

slugzkea

i certanly dont claim to know as much as the guys here about computers, but what games are you playing that you can't play with a q6600?

i have a 8800gt card and i have no trouble running cod4 at full high settings and my OC is only 3.3.

don't get me wrong, i'd like a better OC, but on air, i may not do much better. that said, it sure blows away my old 3500+ venice 2.7ghz

good luck to you

 

[slugzkea]

The main problem is bottlenecking my GX2. any CPU up to this date would bottleneck that card, but I found the q6600 bottlenecks it way more than the e8400.

I just switched boards though, from a GA-EP35-DS3P (which is crap btw) to an Asus Rampage Formula.

So far i'm at 3.5ghz with my Q and frames seem a lot higher.

So i'm gonna fiddle around first with this new board and will post back shortly


But basically, my e8400 at 4.5ghz played crysis at 55-100fps 1024x768x2aa which was super smooth for that game...but my Q on the GA board did much lower than that...about 10fps lower in the Lowest FPS range (under extreme sprites and sounds, 45fps for the Q, 55fps for the Wolfdale).

 

[Automata]

The main problem is bottlenecking my GX2. any CPU up to this date would bottleneck that card

That is a complete blanket statement.

How about this, run a game on dual 24's spanned with everything on high + AA. That is 3840x1200. I can promise that any newer game is going to be bottlenecked by the graphics card.

Now if you were running a 1280x1024 monitor; then yes, I would agree that it is CPU limited.


From what I've read, you have been doing that the entire thread. The Q6600 is an awesome processor and you ARE expecting too much out of it. The "golden" chips can hit 3.8 on air, most can't get to 3.6. That one isn't far off.

Also, please don't try and bypass the swear filter. I would suggest editing your previous posts.

 

[slugzkea]

I apologize

That is a complete blanket statement.

How about this, run a game on dual 24's spanned with everything on high + AA. That is 3840x1200. I can promise that any newer game is going to be bottlenecked by the graphics card.

Now if you were running a 1280x1024 monitor; then yes, I would agree that it is CPU limited.


From what I've read, you have been doing that the entire thread. The Q6600 is an awesome processor and you ARE expecting too much out of it. The "golden" chips can hit 3.8 on air, most can't get to 3.6. That one isn't far off.

Also, please don't try and bypass the swear filter. I would suggest editing your previous posts.

I apologize. I shall edit my previous posts.

I've been very frusterated lately due to bad batches of hardware and I do apologize.

Yes, i was expecting a lot more out of this primitive processor but my SLACR didn't hit 3.8 at all.

I went back to my wolfdale..the wattage for this CPU and power consumption is sky rocketing, and with a GX2 already in my system, a 750w trying to oc my GX2 and a Q isn't going to do it.

Anyways, it was a nice experience. anybody want to by my Q let me know! lol