Is Qx6700 a waste of money?

[Isaac MM]

Well im thinking about buying a Qx6700, im just not sure if its worth paying more for the extra .26...

Im looking to the future thats why i want to buy a quad core, and this new CPU would be for games only

So what do you think?

[Lestat]

i think if you have to ask,,,

[buffbiff21]

Well, the power is there; it's definitely not a waste if you have means of controlling the temperature. There are TWO Conroes under one IHS.

So if you have liquid cooling or phase, go for it.

Otherwise, you are more likely hit a wall at a higher clock speed on a Conroe rather than a Kentsfield due to heat limitations.

The only real difference is the heat.

[ZilverPhish]

As a qx6700 owner I second that ^^^^^^

[Eastcoasthandle]

If you are gaming only, yes it's a waste of time.

[STeel Chicken]

Supreme Commander does a pretty good job useing the extra cores.
I only buy a new machine every 2 years or so, so I like to buy the best thats out at the time.

More games coming out soon that use the extra core goodness as well.

[red]

Save $500, get Q6600.

[Baleful]

I posed the same question a few weeks ago. Personally I would go w/ the 6600 if you have adequate cooling, and just OC it. If money's not an option then get the QX. 4 cores isn't a waste, games right now don't take full advantage of them, but who's to say in a few months they won't? When dual cores came out, everyone said the same thing about them, "oohhh they're a waste of time and money!" haha look at it now.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=141085

[phcjpp]

I was looking at these charts over at toms hardware



I can see almost no difference between q6700 and q6600 in these applications. With a mild overclock on the q6600 you are at the q6700 lvl and as a previous guy said you save 500$. Seems crazy to me to even consider the q6700 ?

Ta
Chris

[NickS]

No way, it rocks!

[phcjpp]

Um sorry ? The toms hardware showed 10 or so real-ish work applications and those 2 chips came in roughly the same. One costs twice the other. While the 6700 is definitely faster its not by 2 x its not even 1.5 or 1.4 or 1.3 or 1.2 or1.1 - it looked to be 1.02 x faster

Chris

[Baleful]

Price/Performance the QX just dosn't add up. That's why i say get the Q6600 and just OC it and you'll basically have the QX, just a few less Mhz. Or if you want that little bit more clock and you don't mind getting your wallet reemed then go for the QX i guess.

[[XC]melymel]

@phcjpp: The point in the QX is it has an unlocked multi so allows it to clock further due to it not having motherboard and ram to limit it. In regular applications it is a waste of money and a q66 is the way to go but remember this is XS so a lot here are dedicated benchmarkers and for that reason the X series chips are the only way to go.

[phcjpp]

@[XC]melymel2789

So given I am planning Striker Extreme, EVGA 8800GTX(SLI), OCZ Flex XLC PC2-9200 with £600 of watercooling on it you reckon the 6700 might still be worth it for me if I can't OC the 6600 ?

Thanks for advice
Chris

[[XC]melymel]

@phcjpp: basically if you don;t plan on doing any heavy benchmarking, you'll be fine on the q66 as I think the fsb wall usually hits around the 350fsb mark so that'll give you around 3.2ghz and considering you will "only" have good watercooling the QX wouldn't clock much further anyway (obviously this is cpu dependent), so the QX likely wouldn't be noticeably faster in everyday use, but it's up to you if it warrants the added cost as from what you have listed there it sounds ike you have a lot of money to spend on a pc.

Anyway I shall stop thread hi-jacking now .

[Eastcoasthandle]

I have yet to see a real need for C2Q as of yet, you will do better with a E6700 or E6750 and call it a day.

[Metroid]

It is a waste of money because the QX6600 overclocked at the same frequency as QX6700 is the same. You are just going to waste your money.

[phcjpp]

Um don't flame me for this but can you buy a qx6600

I see (on scan and overclockers)

q6600
qx6700
qx6800

Ta
Chris

[Speederlander]

Price/Performance the QX just dosn't add up. That's why i say get the Q6600 and just OC it and you'll basically have the QX, just a few less Mhz. Or if you want that little bit more clock and you don't mind getting your wallet reemed then go for the QX i guess.

Assuming you don't need the unlocked multis to really OC it. Quads can be hard to OC. Unlocked helps.

[safan80]

I'd hold off for the QX6800.

[eXceeded]

IMO: I wouldn't even consider the QX6700 since I know with some mild tweaks a Q6600 will beat the the Q6700. The difference is soo minimal that considering the QX6700 isn't even feasible...

[zodden]

Post april price cut I would consider the Q6600 instead and if I got near Qx6700 speed I would be satisfied that I saved so much money and got so much bang out of it. Having said that they are still working out the kinks in duel core. By the time they get around to optimizing for quadcore the price will have come way down. Remember 3rd quarter of this year the price goes way down with the next set of Intel price cuts.

If you get a board that can handle Quad now I would get something cheap like a dual core 6600 and then when the next price cut hits slap a quad in there towards the end of the year.

Also as people have mentioned the cooling is an issue. Without exotic cooling even the best air cooled systems will have problems. I read someplace that a guy was doing well with a Q6600 and a Titan Amanda, which may be the best air cooled setup one could use thats not exotic, and that uses an undervolted peltier to do the job. It also costs about $90, but if your thinking of spending for Qx6700 then money is probably not an issue.

[rithina]

if you are considering upgrading cpu, i think use a normal kents is good enough for gaming considering the fact that some of the newer games are making use of mutli cores.

Or if budget is constrain, get a conroe and use the money for a better GFX or SLI/CF it

overclocking the kents require good cooling as it is hot

[dinos22]

Games = WASTE of money

just get a dual core

[Daveb2012]

If you mean by "is it a waste of $" is it a good value? Then the answer is no. A Q6600 makes a lot more sense.