Seeing as how great the E6700 already performs, I'd like to get an idea as to how many of you guys/gals here would opt for the 6800 which I'm assuming will go for around $1k provided there's no price gauging at first. I'm thinking about that for my next upgrade.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
How many of you here will get Intel Conroe EX6800?
- Thread starter Outrigger
- Start date
$BangforThe$
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,672
My wife already has XE6800 given to her by her brother in law . I will wait On Kentsfield with DDr3 memory ATI chipset. Betties XE6800 is running @ 3.85.ghz on water can go to 4ghz easily. Its fast but to be honest with todays apps its not that much faster in use from the user outlook . Although she hasn't really done any encoding and stuff with it as of yet. I got to play a little with it but she pretty touchy about it right now as her and my daughter are working on the XP register . So I have had limited time on it.
Outrigger said:
If your budget is a concern, then I would go with the 6700. It's kinda along the lines of if you have to ask how much it is... then you can't afford it. The 6800 is for people who don't care about the price, just want the best. There is no way to justify the cost based solely on the performance gains since they are little.
$BangforThe$
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,672
Outrigger said:
Buy the 6700 or wait for Kentsfield. My wife's brother inlaw sold her the XE6800 for $500. So she took it.
Chris_Morley
Former [H] Consumer Managing Ed.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2000
- Messages
- 3,609
Was it an engineering sample?$BangforThe$ said:
Poncho said:
well its not that I have an extremely tight budget, but I wouldn't want to pay double just for a small performance increase, but if the performance increase is a bit more substantial, then yeah I'd go for it. in other words, if the performance increase is like the 4800+ vs. fx60 then I would just stick with the 6700, but the kentsfield looks interesting. wonder what the pricing on that might be like.
Poncho said:Like I said... the performace gains DO NOT justify the costs. People by the XE line to have the biggest E-Penis.To some... having the best is the most important thing.
hmmm instead of jumping onto conroe, I might wait for kentsfield, which looks like it might launch at year end. 2 e6600 on one cpu.... didn't think it would be so soon for quad cores.
BillLeeLee
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 13,486
I thought the only major difference this go around was that the XE Conroes only had higher clockspeeds, no special additional L3 cache or other megafeature that would even begin to justify the extra $500. I'm just going to stay conservative this go around, even with a job. I don't need top of the line, I just want excellent performance for my dollar.
Plus, I'd just overclock if the only real difference was just clock speed (since even the FSBs are supposed to be the same between the XE and the regular 6x00s.
Plus, I'd just overclock if the only real difference was just clock speed (since even the FSBs are supposed to be the same between the XE and the regular 6x00s.
I was just looking at some super pi benches between the 6700 and the 6800 and we're talking about maybe 2 to 3 second difference. If I'm not going for the kentsfield, I will def. go for the 6700, not likely to notice any difference unless you're doing benches which doesn't give me pleasure, only real world apps do. but if kentsfield is coming Q1 of next year I will wait for that and skip conroe altogether. man, never thought I'd come back to the intel side again.
I really dont have a cap on my pc budget, but that is besides the point. When I first upgraded from a 3.4 Northwood to the 3.4 Gallatin the difference was marginal most of the time. I gained maybe 5-10 FPS in certain games, but if thats the difference between running 2x AA or 4x AA Ill gladly pay the extra $500. With my Dell 3007 and me having a hard on for playing all the games @ native res with some or all eye candy turned on......Ill take all the extra frames I can get.
$BangforThe$
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,672
Chris_Morley said:
No it wasn't
Chris_Morley
Former [H] Consumer Managing Ed.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2000
- Messages
- 3,609
Interesting. How did he get a retail sample so early? Do you have pictures of the packaging?$BangforThe$ said:
Majin said:
To anyone with a small monitor who is on a budget Id say you are right, but in my case running the 3007 even 5FPS could make a game more enjoyable. You really cant expect to double your performance because its double the price.
Anyone with a race car will tell you the same thing. Sometimes it takes a shit load of money just to squeeze out a couple ponies. To some its not worth it and its a waste of money....to me.....lets just say people think Im crazy.
D4hPr0 said:To anyone with a small monitor who is on a budget Id say you are right, but in my case running the 3007 even 5FPS could make a game more enjoyable. You really cant expect to double your performance because its double the price.
Anyone with a race car will tell you the same thing. Sometimes it takes a shit load of money just to squeeze out a couple ponies. To some its not worth it and its a waste of money....to me.....lets just say people think Im crazy.
Anyone thinking that double the price = double the performance needs their head examined, however, when I pay double the money, I'd like to see NOTICEBLE performance increase in real world apps and not just benchmarks that I'm not kicking myself in the ass for paying double. just like going sli does not net twice the performance over that of a single vid card, but it IS noticeble enough for me that I don't regret buying the extra card.
coldpower27
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2005
- Messages
- 1,154
I don't really understand why your upgrading though that system in your sig should be equal to maybe the E6300 so not too shabby.Outrigger said:
In terms of value for the money the X6800 is obvious the lowest in that regard. Flagship CPU's are always worst value for your dollar, fortunately this is not as pronounced on video cards.
SLI is different performance gains there are on the order of 60-80% on average which is reasonable for double the price and as long as your not CPU limited. Though graphics are entirely different thing as they are inherently parrallel so allow easier scaling.
Even justifying the E6700 over the E6600 is fairly difficult, the E6700 is 68% more expensive, for 11% more clockspeed which may translate to 9% enhanced performance assuming 8/10 scaling.
Never mind X6800 which is 88.5% more expensive then the E6700 for 10% more clockspeed, or 8% more performance.
Instead of spending an extra $500 on an X6800 for extra FPS in games, that $500 would better be spent on an additional video card. A 6700 and a X1900XTX crossfire system will perform better in all games compared to a X6800 with a single X1900XTX. At higher resolutions of course.
coldpower27 said:
you're right, my system isn't too shabby at all, so thats why I'm going to upgrade when kentsfield comes out next year, by that time, there should be plenty of matx mobos. I'm going to skip conroe altogether, even though its hard what with everyone jumping on it, but my system is already an overkill for what I do. I'm assuming kentsfield will be compatible with LGA775 mobos or its a diff socket?
BillLeeLee
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 13,486
Outrigger said:
It will either use that socket, or quite possibly Socket P which launches in early 2007.
coldpower27
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2005
- Messages
- 1,154
Socket P though seem to be slated to be utilize for the Santa Rosa platform, not the desktop.BillLeeLee said:
So now we have 3 sockets.
LGA 771 , Socket J for Servers
LGA 775 , Socket T for Desktops
xxx xxx, Socket P for Mobiles