What's the problem with qcores?

[lt_wentoncha]

Hi all,

Well, it's no big secret prices are dropping, right? I'm very intrigued with a $266 Q6600, but I've been seeing issues pop up here at [H]:

1) Heat is a major concern
2) qcore has potential mem bottlenecks in relation to FSB and sharing between cores
3) Gaming performance has no notable increase
4) Lack of mobo support

As of now, I'm debating between this and a E6600 or E6540/E6550 (if I want to hold out for 1333 FSB). The discussion would be moot for me if the Q6600 never reaches $266, but if it does...I just don't know what to pick. Would the E6550 be better for gaming over the Q6600 if multi-processor optimization becomes more prevalent given it's got a wider FSB?

Thanks for reading and replying.

 

[RamonGTP]

1) I have not seen much of a problem with heat, not anymore than a dual core CPU
2) In theory it's possible, in practice I have yet to see any real bottlenecks.
3) This is true for the most part, with a few exceptions
4) Many boards that supprot C2D will support a C2Q with a bios update

 

[mwarps]

1) Not really.
2) Not real-world proof.
3) Depends on the game. Supreme Commander, for example, C&C3, and others will.
4) Motherboard support is a non-sequitor. If the motherboard doesn't support quad, don't buy it. There are plenty of inexpensive models that do.

 

[divve]

If you're planning to OC you may want to shy away from the 1333 FSB versions with a locked multiplier CPU. They may limit your max frequency ceiling due to lower internal multipliers and thereby requiring a higher relative FSB for every speed increase.