E8400

what about the e8500, even though the speed increase might not be worth the extra $50. i don't mind spending a little extra though ;p

You'll get almost no fps increase in games. Most people buy E8400 to OC it to 3.6+ ghz.

But yeah don't think its worth extra $50.

E8400, stick with DDR2.

Go with a Q6600. Stick to DDR 2. ( i seen them now for like 130 pounds new)

q6600 has better long term future once it starts to become more mainstream and is already fast enough to play present games.

If you look at your pc as an investment which it is over the next 2-3 years Quad core is by far the best investment and your pc wont even break a sweat.

And in a years time you can safely overclock them to at least 3 ghz a core (from 2.4ghz) and essentially get a free upgrade as they overclock nicely on standard cooling. And thats not to mention the advantages you get doing CPU tasks like unzipping/video stuff etc.

Just remember when everyone said you dont need dual core when they came on the scene, and I assure you the same ignorance surrounds Quad core.

"If you look at your pc as an investment which it is over the next 2-3 years Quad core is by far the best investment"

how does that "2-3 year investment" go together with "Stick to DDR2."?...

because every component on a pc has a certain amount of potential assigned to it which has an impact on performance.
And ram once you reach a certain level is one which does not yield obvious improvements.

Also chances are he's gonna stick with XP 32 bit, which means more than 4 gig is redundant and the extra benefits DDR 3 bring over DDR are going to be small.

Also when you consider it's more expensive to make that investment now (and I'm talking approx 200 dollars) I really don't think it's worth caring about too much as you gotta draw the line somewhere as cost is always afactor.

The bottom line is if you have 4 gig of ddr 2 ram in 2 years time, you're not going to banging your head everyday wishing you done otherwise.

Whats important is he get's the right CPU and a p35 chipset and then he can upgrade things like dd3 when the price/performance ratio evens out and it becomes a worthwhile upgrade.

Right now its a bad investment for most people who want to attain a good performance/price ratio.

similar to what i posted above, what about he q6700 or the q9300/q9450? i plan on overclocking also, probably right out of the box.

I believe the 6700 is the same CPU as 6600 cept it running at 2.66ghz so you're paying around 100 dollars for something you're going to do for nothing with the 6600.

So not worth it. The other one's yeah, but again you're probably looking at at least 150 bucks more, but unlike the 6700 it does give you more L2 cache so yeah something like 9450 would be a smarter choice than the 6600, but again, it's a lot of money and if you clock 6600 to 3.2-3.5 you're probably gonna still be faster than stock 9450 and then use the money for a better GPU.

Here a list of CPU's in CPU intensive tasks only, it still a good read http://www.benchwell.com/

Notice the overclocked q6600 over the 9450.
It really is that good a chip.

e8400 and ddr2. If you are building this for gaming that is what you should get. Buying q6600 in the hopes it will be better in a few years is quite frankly stupid. I have my [email protected](stock voltage) and I got it over 4ghz stable, I just liked having my case fans at slow speeds so my machine is quiet and cool. I can run Crysis smoothly with 1680*1050 and all settings in high. It's a nobrainer tbh. Quad core might be better in the future but it isn't now.

Yes, but if the quadcore is sufficient enough to get great framerates in the current crop of games (which Im sure it is) it's retarded NOT TO go for the quadcore given that devs WILL (it's a fact not fiction) utilise it, games like Alan Wake are coming out this year and will utilise it.

you say its a no brainer, ironically the exact opposuite is true.

you're suggesting going for Dual core knowing that a quad core will run the current crop of games well enough (not to notice any real world that nothing a slightly lower rez would not fix) and you have the added benefit of a CPU that's more future proof, will be utilised more and more and has better performace at CPU intensive tasks AND won't be screaming it's tits off for hours on end.

Sorry but the facts speak for themselves. Do you really think if I stick your gfx card in my quadcore pc I'm going to be saying oh this sucks compared to the dual core.

At the end of the day a q6600 has the potential for 3.5 ghz a core x 4 = 14 ghz of power.
At best yours has 8 ghz and that's ragging the absolute tits out of it, which increases the chances of long term instablity.

Most people who buy a good rig now will expect it to last a good two years. Quad core is the best investment for those looking to have a pc that's still going to be impressive in 16 months time.

At the end of the day a q6600 has the potential for 3.5 ghz a core x 4 = 14 ghz of power.
At best yours has 8 ghz and that's ragging the absolute tits out of it, which increases the chances of long term instablity.


That's not how it works idiot. Also my chip at 4ghz would be a less of an overclock than the q6600 with a lot less volts going through it. So basically you have mentioned one game that will possibly use quad core. Well all the current graphics engines don't. Buy it in three years when Nehalem and ddr3/ddr4 has become the standard. Now it's a waste of money for gaming.

E8400 or Q9450, both are new gen and manufactured 45nm tech so they are not making so much heat. Also E7200 is good choice if you OC.

why not E8200?

Imo the quad is for later, when more games make better use of quadcores (like Unreal Engine 3 began to do). So when your games run smoothly now anyways, why not save something for later? If you can afford it, take a Q9450, otherwise the Q6600 is a good pick too.

i think the price/power ratio is better in E8400 + those are confirmed to OC really well, even with default cooler.

they are the same, with the only difference being the default clockspeed. If you go overclocking, you`ll only have to be lucky to get a good example. I doubt the chances are bigger with the E8400 and if its worth the extra money.