E8400 vs E6600

A

aamsel

Gawd
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
940
I have an Intel BOX975XBX2 with an E6600 right now, that I have run between stock and 3.3GHz. I am considering an upgrade to an E8400 and an ABIT IP35 Pro. My question is:
Would you consider this to be a worthwhile upgrade? Is the motherboard a step up or a step down, and how much an upgrade is the E8400?
Please advise.

Thanks!
 
It's not going to be noticable at all. I'd save your money until Intel's new chips are out later this year, then you can get a new motherboard, cpu, and ddr3 ram and be good for a while.
 
I concur with everyone else so far: Not a worthwhile upgrade. Not enough performance offered over the E6600 to justify the additional $200 for the CPU alone. The mobo is a good choice but if that Intel mobo is serving your needs just fine, don't bother with a mobo upgrade either.

Then again, what are you doing with your PC now that you think warrants a CPU upgrade?
 
I don't think you'd see a noticeable change. The only benefit is lower heat production, but that's about it. I am running an E8400 on a IP35-Pro and absolutely love it but I came from an X2-4200.
 
Sounds like it is not worth it.

So...
What current processor WOULD BE an upgrade from an E6600 that is not a $1,000+ extreme editition type CPU?

Also, I know this is not the mobo forum, but perhaps I will try the IP35 Pro just to see if it does more with my E6600 than the Badaxe 2 can? Or is the IP35 Pro generally considered a downgrade from the Badaxe 2?
 
Danny Bui said:
...Then again, what are you doing with your PC now that you think warrants a CPU upgrade?
Click to expand...

My "highest and best use" is video encoding, so I am waiting on either CPU's or hard drives, maybe memory would make a difference also.
 
EDIT: Sorry, I originally posted that I have an E6400 and Badaxe 2.
I have an E6600 and Badaxe 2.

Is the Q6600 a true upgrade to the E6600, worth the $200?
 
aamsel said:
What encoding programs currently make proper use of the quad core?
Click to expand...

These articles should help:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=8
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2quad-q6600_9.html#sect0

Hmm, might want to OC the Q6600 a little bit. Do note that the E6850 is clocked at 3.0Ghz and the Q6600 was clocked in at 2.4Ghz. So once OC'd that Q6600 will be faster in encoding times.

Oh and don't sign your name at the bottom. Apparently it's against Forum rules.
 
If you have an itch to upgrade then get q6600 GO + abit ip pro p35 or dfi dk p35 then OC to 3g (333fsb x 9 multiplier).
 
Thanks.

Looks like the Q6600 is not going to be "earth-shatteringly faster" than an E6600 running 3.0GHz or faster, would that be correct.

Also, the 1333 FSB of the Wolfdale E8400 is no big deal compared to a 1066 FSB CPU like the E6600?

So, the only gain to the E8400 over an E6600 running 3.0 or faster would be:
1.) lower wattage
2.) cooler opertation
3.) possibly wider overclock range closer to 4GHz.
4.) 6MB cache vs 4MB cache.

The problems with choosing an affordable upgrade to the E6600 seem to be that the competitors are now a year old, and anything newer is too expensive?
 
Looks like the Q6600 is not going to be "earth-shatteringly faster" than an E6600 running 3.0GHz or faster, would that be correct.
Click to expand...

At stock speeds, no. The 2.4Ghz Q6600 will perform about the same as a 3.0Ghz E6600. But once you OC the Q6600 to 3.0Ghz or even 3.6Ghz if you're lucky, it will perform significantly faster than the 3.0Ghz E6600 provided that app takes advantage of quad cores. Look over the Xbit review again. The 3.6Ghz Q6600 managed to beat the 3.0Ghz E6850 significantly.

At least with the Q6600, you don't have to replace your motherboard.

aamsel said:
So, the only gain to the E8400 over an E6600 running 3.0 or faster would be:
1.) lower wattage
2.) cooler opertation
3.) possibly wider overclock range closer to 4GB.
4.) 6MB cache vs 4MB cache.
Click to expand...

Even then the E8400 gains are of small:
1) 7 to 13W less than the E6600 at load
2) 4 to 7C cooler than the E6600 at load.
4) Hit these links to see the effect of a large L2 cache:
Does cache size really boost performance? @ Tom's
Influence of L2 Cache Size on Conroe Processors Performance @ XBit
UT3 Review: Cache Scaling: 1MB, 2MB, 4MB @ AnandTech
2MB or 4MB Cache? @ AnandTech
Influence of L2 Cache Size on Wolfdale Performance @ Xbit

aamsel said:
The problems with choosing an affordable upgrade to the E6600 seem to be that the competitors are now a year old, and anything newer is too expensive?
Click to expand...

Kind of. The main problem finding an upgrade to the E6600 is finding a CPU that provides enough of a performance increase to warrant the cost of upgrading. Even the $200 Q6600 is a bit of stretch.
 
Danny Bui said:
...
Kind of. The main problem finding an upgrade to the E6600 is finding a CPU that provides enough of a performance increase to warrant the cost of upgrading. Even the $200 Q6600 is a bit of stretch.
Click to expand...

Sounds like I will stay with my E6600 for awhile.


Corbin said:
I think you mean GHz. Srry it was just bugging me.
Click to expand...

Of course, sorry, just tired.
 
I upgraded my e6600 that ran at 3.2ghz to an e8400 that runs at 4.3 ghz and I can certainly tell the difference. Having said that, I wouldn't recommend the upgrade unless you play a lot of games. The e6600 should be fast enough for anything else. Another thing lucky and my chip was from a great batch. Every chip won't always clock the same, but most e8400's should at least be able to hit 4ghz.
 
i upgrade from e6600 to e8400 and, personally, i felt the upgrade was worth it. i had the e6600 running at 3.54 ghz at 1.5v. the temps were fairly high and the cpu cooler was nice and toasty to the touch, especially at load.

i currently have my e8400 running stable 24/7 at 4.005 at 1.34v and the cooler barely gets warm, even at load. it's only about 500mhz increase but i can definitely "feel" the difference and got a nice 2000 plus increase on 3dmark06. you could probably sell the e6600 for about a 100 bucks... which means you'll be getting the e8400 for less than $100!
 
The only thing right now is the Q6600, and only for apps that take advantage, as Danny has already stated. And as you stated earlier, you do a lot of video encoding, which is the main type of app that benefits from more cores, as it can split the encoding between sections of the video and run them in parallel. So, instead of 2 cores encoding 2 sections of the video, you'll have 4 cores encoding 4 sections in parallel.

Spread your upgrades out, and you'll notice more of a performance difference. Keep in mind that intel has a tick/tock scheme. So, if you always buy at each tick and tock, you will never notice a huge performance gain. However, if you skip a tick and tock, you'll notice it more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top