Intel Newb ?: 6x00 vs. 6x50

[RottnJP]

O.K., I apologize in advance if this is laid out somewhere, and I just haven't found it- feel free to just refer me to a juicy old thread without busting my chops too bad- I *did* search! :p

Why do the 6x00 CPU's command a premium? The only thing I've seen is they have a 10x mult compared to x8... That can't be all there is too it, can it? I mean, if you pick the right mobo you may get a better OC at the system level by dropping the multiplier anyway, right?

I'm getting ready to put my old FX-55 warrior out to pasture (well, light duty as my wife's office machine, anyway) and have been looking at the 6700 or 6750... Why the heck does the 6700 cost more than the 6850??

Thanks for any help!! :toast:

[hat]

I would like to know as well.

[btarunr]

because 6x00 (Conroe 1066) were released before 6x50 (Conroe 1333). Intel released the Conroe 1333 with aggressive pricing. (because AMD was slashing it's prices at that time) The 1066 parts stayed and their prices weren't slashed to encourage buying a conroe1333 (and the chipset that supported it (Intel P31/P35/G33/G31))

The Conroe 1066 parts you now see in the market are left-overs, Intel doesn't produce them anymore, some of them were recalled and rebadged into the Celeron Dual-Core E2xxx.

[erocker]

Also the 6850 has a x9 multi and the 6700 has a x10 multi, generally the higher the multi the more expensive the chip as well, plus what btarunr said..

[btarunr]

well a multiplier can't be the cause of $50 gaps between equivalent models.

[hat]

btarunr is a pretty valueble part of the community, heh

[Ripper3]

No, bu the can cause gaps of $100 or something just as absurd, just look at the old Athlon 64s, there was the 3500+, still reasonably priced, at something like £175 at the time, then the 3800+ cost something like £250, and the main difference the end user would notice was that they were using different multiplier values (11x for 3500+ and 12x for 3800+). The truth was, the architecture behind them was slightly different, the 3500+ was a Winchester core, made on 90nm manufacturing process, and the 3800+ was a 130nm Clawhammer. The dfferences inside madethe difference.
Maybe this is the same case, not only Intel didn't slash to prices, to increase adoption of newer technologies, but also, there's the fact that the architecture might have been more expensive, including the price for every 1000 units, meaning the resellers need to have a price premium to recoup their costs.


btarunr is a pretty valueble part of the community, heh

QFT

[btarunr]

btarunr is a pretty valueble part of the community, heh

I've got a 10% thanks rate. Thank you Hat!

QFT = ?

[Ripper3]

I've got a 10% thanks rate. Thank you Hat!

QFT = ?

Heh, I've had to look up an awful lot of these stupid internet phrases, and I've ended up just picking them up along the way.
QFT = Quoted For Truth

[RottnJP]

Oh, oh, maybe I can get a "Thanks" if I'm fast enough! "Quite F'ing True"
:)

So, it sounds like, knowing I'm going to OC it, the 6750 is looking like a pretty solid choice.

Thanks guys! Great to get such a fast knowledgable response!!

[RottnJP]

QFT = Quoted For Truth

LOL- I suppose that works too, but mine is the way I hear it from the voices in my head... :toast:

[btarunr]

Quite f****...........lol Ripper can't be that gross.

[Ripper3]

Oh, oh, maybe I can get a "Thanks" if I'm fast enough! "Quite F'ing True"
:)

So, it sounds like, knowing I'm going to OC it, the 6750 is looking like a pretty solid choice.

Thanks guys! Great to get such a fast knowledgable response!!

WOW! I beat someone to a reply for once! Heh

The Core 2 Duos all overclock quite well, of course YMMV, and your stepping will be a big indicator here. As far as I know the B2 stepping of the earlier chips were good overclockers (have an E6300 B2 myself but not exactly pushed it very far, but it's running at 2.86GHz with 1.35v, and I could probably lower the voltage, but I'm just seeing if I can break it in a bit more first), and the newer G0 steppings (which the Q6600 SLACR or something is part of, and is very overclockable,a nd very popular, selling like hot cakes at £150-160 here, and can usualy get from 2.4GHz all the way to 3.6GHz without much effort). I think the L2 was not so good, with a forum thread I read, while searching for overclocks on the E6300s, showing that any increase of FSB, with the stock/highest multiplier, would usually not work, and lowering it by 1x, would, but it would still require excessive voltage, etc. Might have been just a few cases, but, meh, don't know, don't own one.
If you're getting one from the E6x50 range though, I think they're all quite 'clockable, being on G0 steppings mostly, if I remember rightly.

[Ripper3]

LOL- I suppose that works too, but mine is the way I hear it from the voices in my head... :toast:

Well, I won't disagree with the voices in your head, but mine are a little cleaner. Think it's my conscience though, most of the time. Waste of resources I say.

Quite f****...........lol Ripper can't be that gross.

Dunno what's so gross about the word itself, but only the actual implied meaning could be seen as obscene or gross really. I guess it's each to his own.



EDIT: Sorry for double post, heh.

[fitseries3]

Oh, oh, maybe I can get a "Thanks" if I'm fast enough! "Quite F'ing True"
:)

So, it sounds like, knowing I'm going to OC it, the 6750 is looking like a pretty solid choice.

Thanks guys! Great to get such a fast knowledgable response!!

the 1066 conroe's overclock a lot easier and farther than the 1333's do. i have an e6700 for sale that has a 10x multi and i can guauranty 3.9ghz on it, if anyone is interested. the e6700 would be better than the e6750.

[fitseries3]

price, son

they're going for $170 on ebay used. does that sound resonable? it's a damn good chip.

[fitseries3]

no. that sounds pathetic. people are selling Q6600s used for $195.

bullshit... one guy has a B3 q6600 for $195 on here and now everyone thinks they can get chips super cheap. i can do $160 at best. it's FLAWLESS and comes in retail box with cooler. i still have the reciept from newegg and it's less than 4 months old. it's barely used at all.

[fitseries3]

:ohwell: nope. But thanks for the offer nevertheless.

i wasn't offering it to you.

[fitseries3]

but well we were conversing on that:rolleyes: you were convincing. I merely thanked you on everybody's behalf for that wonderful offer.

i notice your sarcasm. how nice.

[RottnJP]

BWOOP! BWOOP! BWOOP! Hijacking in progress- Gentlemen, shoulder your e-peens, and return to the topic at hand.

Which was, IIRC: F'ing: "Gross" or "Awesome"?

I say, it's a great process- nothing gross about it. I'm a big fan, and highly recommend it!!
:rockout:

Actually, I'm curious about the comment above that the 1066's overclock "easier and farther." Specifics- Why do you say that? I would think, just being a newb to intle OC'ing, a good board that's a match for the 6750'2 bus speed (i.e. P35) would do just as well, or potentially better...

[btarunr]

Ok I'll do us a favour and delete all my off-topic posts on this thread.:toast:

[trog100]

i have just bought the e6750 cos of its nice price.. it has the x 8 multiplier.. 8 x 333 = 2.66 gig..

but i wish i had a higher one.. its the 8 x multiplier thats holding things back.. having to run a 500/2000 fsb to get 4 gigs aint exactly ideal..

the e6850 with its 9 x multiplier would make the 4 gig and over mark far easier for me..

with an fsb at round 450/1800-ish both the mobo and memory would have it far easier..

soo i recon the higher multiplier is pretty usefull.. the e6750 with its x8 multiplier dosnt help..

trog

ps.. my board is an abit ip35 pro by the way.. and 4 gigs might sound high but its what i intended to aim for.. 3.6 is cruising

[fitseries3]

i have just bought the e6750 cos of its nice price.. it has the x 8 multiplier.. 8 x 333 = 2.66 gig..

but i wish i had a higher one.. its the 8 x multiplier thats holding things back.. having to run a 500 fsb to get 4 gigs aint exactly ideal..

the e6850 with its 9 x multiplier would make the 4 gig and over mark far easier for me..

with an fsb at round 450-ish both the mobo and memory would have it far easier..

soo i recon the higher multiplier is pretty usefull.. the e6750 with its x8 multiplier dosnt help..

trog

ps.. my board is an abit ip35 pro by the way.. and 4 gigs might sound high but its what i intended to aim for.. 3.6 is cruising

EXACTLY. i can hit high clocks at a lower FSB. i can hit 4ghz at 10 x 400 at 1.47v i just dont like the temps too well and the speed isn't needed in my HTPC. i just run it at 3.2ghz(320x10 at stock voltage) the farthest i ever got my e6700 was 4.3ghz@1.56v now that i've got water i should try harder. i bet i can get it to 4.5ghz. it's a great chip, but i want another q6600 to play with. that's why im selling it.

[RottnJP]

O.K., that makes sense.... So does the C2D 6600 also run a 10x like the 6700? So what's the story on the Q's? 6600, 6700 both run x10?

[kwchang007]

O.K., that makes sense.... So does the C2D 6600 also run a 10x like the 6700? So what's the story on the Q's? 6600, 6700 both run x10?

No, the 6600s use 9x multiplers.

[fitseries3]

O.K., that makes sense.... So does the C2D 6600 also run a 10x like the 6700? So what's the story on the Q's? 6600, 6700 both run x10?

e6700/q6700 have a 10x and e6600/q6600 is a 9x multi. dont pay more for a q6700 when the q6600 can get just as far. the e6700 IS worth the extra $$. i have had an e6600 and it couldn't get as far as my e6700 can.

the multi and L2 cache is the only difference on MOST core 2 duo/quads. all are conroe cores EXCEPT the few that are allendale cores. even the quads are just 2x conroe cores on one board. intel does that so they can make 1 chip design and clock each individual chip to a different speed for different price ranges.

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

wow .. a lot of ppl going intel ...

[Mussels]

the 1066 conroe's overclock a lot easier and farther than the 1333's do. i have an e6700 for sale that has a 10x multi and i can guauranty 3.9ghz on it, if anyone is interested. the e6700 would be better than the e6750.

The 6x50 line do OC higher in MHz, but the lower multis hamper you.

As an example, my storage system has an E6750 and DDR2 800
with an 8x multiplier, if i run a 400FSB i get 3.2GHz - and the ram is at 800 and wont go lower. To OC any higher OC's the ram, and the system doesnt like that.

If getting a 6x50 chip, get the 6750 and some good ram (1066Mhz and a mobo that does 450 FSB+) or just go a Q6600 (same price as E6850) because they have a 200 FSB at stock, with a 9x multi :)

[fitseries3]

_FBi;580016']wow .. a lot of ppl going intel ...

i went intel in february 2007... if AMD could've got their shit together earlier, a lot of people would still have AMD. i still love AMD, but their performance per $ sucks right now. once they get FUSION together i think the tables will be turned.

[fitseries3]

The 6x50 line do OC higher in MHz, but the lower multis hamper you.

As an example, my storage system has an E6750 and DDR2 800
with an 8x multiplier, if i run a 400FSB i get 3.2GHz - and the ram is at 800 and wont go lower. To OC any higher OC's the ram, and the system doesnt like that.

If getting a 6x50 chip, get the 6750 and some good ram (1066Mhz and a mobo that does 450 FSB+) or just go a Q6600 (same price as E6850) because they have a 200 FSB at stock, with a 9x multi :)

AGREED. Q6600 is probably the BEST chip out right now. it may cost a bit, but can outrun ANY dual core chip and hang with the UBER expensive quads.

And if people wanna bitch about prices... i remember when the Athlon XP 3200+ was selling for $220 and EVERYONE had to have one. $279 for a quad isn't bad AT ALL. it's worth EVERY PENNY.

[Mussels]

i sold two more Q6600 systems this week. On the stock cooler with 4GB 667 ram (its down to $25 for 1GB 667 ram here in aus! crazy) each system could UNDERvolt and overclock to 3GHz

333FSB x9 = 3Ghz, 1:1 ratio with 667 ram (with options of 800 and 1066 if they want faster ram), stock cooler and around 50C load (average between the cores) (might as well be a Q6850 to be honest :P )

The chips are just awesome for the price, beacuse they OC so easy/well, they can outpace the dual cores.

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

AGREED. Q6600 is probably the BEST chip out right now. it may cost a bit, but can outrun ANY dual core chip and hang with the UBER expensive quads.

And if people wanna bitch about prices... i remember when the Athlon XP 3200+ was selling for $220 and EVERYONE had to have one. $279 for a quad isn't bad AT ALL. it's worth EVERY PENNY.


i agree i remember when 4200 x2's were for teh same price as a q6600 ... http://www.wheelsjamaica.com/wheels_forum/Smileys/default/001_beatup.gif and that wasnt long ago ..

[RottnJP]

I read a lot about the Q6600 being a great 'clocker, and the E6700 supposedly much better than the E6600... Why is that- isn't the Q6600 is really just 2 E6600 cores slapped together? With so little that I care about being optimized for quads, I'm not sure that in real applications I will notice it. (Obviously the quads will domintate in benchmarks, but I don't really care about those.)

On the other hand, it seems like quads are penetrating faster than, oh, say, 64 bit processing, so maybe we'll see better multi-threaded apps soon?

[Wile E]

I read a lot about the Q6600 being a great 'clocker, and the E6700 supposedly much better than the E6600... Why is that- isn't the Q6600 is really just 2 E6600 cores slapped together? With so little that I care about being optimized for quads, I'm not sure that in real applications I will notice it. (Obviously the quads will domintate in benchmarks, but I don't really care about those.)

On the other hand, it seems like quads are penetrating faster than, oh, say, 64 bit processing, so maybe we'll see better multi-threaded apps soon?More multi threaded apps sprout up everyday. The more that come along, the faster the quad system will actually get.

As for the OCing potential of the Q6600, most people are referring to the newer G0 stepping quad. They aren't actually E6600 cores, as Intel doesn't produce those cores any more. The older Q6600 is the B3 stepping, and doesn't clock nearly as well (on average). Those are the ones that are essentially 2 E6600s on the same chip. The G0 Q6600s are essentially 2 E6850s on the same chip, that have been downclocked to 1066MHz (266 real) fsb.

I just ordered my Q6600 from ClubIt :D (And a Maximus Formula from Newegg. I can't wait)

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

More multi threaded apps sprout up everyday. The more that come along, the faster the quad system will actually get.

As for the OCing potential of the Q6600, most people are referring to the newer G0 stepping quad. They aren't actually E6600 cores, as Intel doesn't produce those cores any more. The older Q6600 is the B3 stepping, and doesn't clock nearly as well (on average). Those are the ones that are essentially 2 E6600s on the same chip. The G0 Q6600s are essentially 2 E6850s on the same chip, that have been downclocked to 1066MHz (266 real) fsb.

I just ordered my Q6600 from ClubIt :D (And a Maximus Formula from Newegg. I can't wait)

so thats why they clock so welll ...

[btarunr]

More multi threaded apps sprout up everyday. The more that come along, the faster the quad system will actually get.

As for the OCing potential of the Q6600, most people are referring to the newer G0 stepping quad. They aren't actually E6600 cores, as Intel doesn't produce those cores any more. The older Q6600 is the B3 stepping, and doesn't clock nearly as well (on average). Those are the ones that are essentially 2 E6600s on the same chip. The G0 Q6600s are essentially 2 E6850s on the same chip, that have been downclocked to 1066MHz (266 real) fsb.

I just ordered my Q6600 from ClubIt :D (And a Maximus Formula from Newegg. I can't wait)

Oh....so that the difference between B3 and G0. I didn't know that.

Ahem....a B3 can go just as far as a G0 does, only the B3 gets hotter as we OC. I live virtually middle of nowhere (a la Courage the cowardly dog) and Danger Den setups cost a bomb. I've to make do with a CNPS9700....good till it's ~3.2 GHz. After that it acts funny. I actually UC it to 2.1 GHz in summers. How's that?!

[Mussels]

Oh....so that the difference between B3 and G0. I didn't know that.

Ahem....a B3 can go just as far as a G0 does, only the B3 gets hotter as we OC. I live virtually middle of nowhere (a la Courage the cowardly dog) and Danger Den setups cost a bomb. I've to make do with a CNPS9700....good till it's ~3.2 GHz. After that it acts funny. I actually UC it to 2.1 GHz in summers. How's that?!

they can OC the same, but the temps make all the difference. mines runs 3.6GHz on this air cooling, and its stable at these clocks even upto 80C at load - on average its mid 60's, but i did have a few summer days i forgot to lower the clocks and i saw high 70's at load. it worried me a bit, but the system never even sneezed.

[Wile E]

Ahem....a B3 can go just as far as a G0 does, only the B3 gets hotter as we OC. I live virtually middle of nowhere (a la Courage the cowardly dog) and Danger Den setups cost a bomb. I've to make do with a CNPS9700....good till it's ~3.2 GHz. After that it acts funny. I actually UC it to 2.1 GHz in summers. How's that?!When I say a G0 clocks better, I mean with normal cooling systems in place. Sure, a B3 may be able to get to 4Ghz, but you'll likely need phase or TEC to do it. Many G0's can reach it on air. So, in general, the G0 clocks further for the average OCer.

[btarunr]

This is communism:laugh: we're all equals....just that some of us are more equal than others (B3 & G0):laugh::laugh:

[Mussels]

This is communism:laugh: we're all equals....just that some of us are more equal than others (B3 & G0):laugh::laugh:

ask not what your Q6600 can do for you... but what you can do for your Q6600!

[btarunr]

ask not what your Q6600 can do for you... but what you can do for your Q6600!

That's verbatim what me dad always says, except "Q6600" replaced with "computer", being disgusted at the way I spurge my earnings on this stuff:laugh:

[Ripper3]

In Soviet Russia, computer overclocks you!

Ah, those jokes are so so bad...

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

Oh....so that the difference between B3 and G0. I didn't know that.

Ahem....a B3 can go just as far as a G0 does, only the B3 gets hotter as we OC. I live virtually middle of nowhere (a la Courage the cowardly dog) and Danger Den setups cost a bomb. I've to make do with a CNPS9700....good till it's ~3.2 GHz. After that it acts funny. I actually UC it to 2.1 GHz in summers. How's that?!


your not alone ... i get 40 degree ambients where i loe (tropical island), my apartments ventilation doesnt help much.

[btarunr]

@ Ripper
Not bad, you were absolutely right, good joke too. :laugh:


BTW, Does anyone else have a B3 Q6600?

@FBI,
see, that makes us equals among equals :laugh:

[RottnJP]

Thanks again for the great info guys. I was all set to get a Q6600, and a buddy gave me a AMD X2 5600+ over the holidays, so now I need to learn about AMD chipsets- D'oh! ;) (My buddy works for AMD, though, so I'm going to pick his brain to figure out what mobo to go with.)

As for the high number of folks switching to Intel... I am definitely an AMD fanboi (or more correctly, a fan of open competition and the advantages it brings) but with the current generation Intel is on top. C'est la vie. But don't forget, AMD is the sole survivor of the brutal CPU competitons of the '80's- They know how to compete as a value option, and they know how to make it back to the top. Don't count 'em out yet- it'll just take some time. (Don't bother asking how much time, though, cuz I'm sworn to secrecy already! :laugh: )

[Wile E]

Thanks again for the great info guys. I was all set to get a Q6600, and a buddy gave me a AMD X2 5600+ over the holidays, so now I need to learn about AMD chipsets- D'oh! ;) (My buddy works for AMD, though, so I'm going to pick his brain to figure out what mobo to go with.)

As for the high number of folks switching to Intel... I am definitely an AMD fanboi (or more correctly, a fan of open competition and the advantages it brings) but with the current generation Intel is on top. C'est la vie. But don't forget, AMD is the sole survivor of the brutal CPU competitons of the '80's- They know how to compete as a value option, and they know how to make it back to the top. Don't count 'em out yet- it'll just take some time. (Don't bother asking how much time, though, cuz I'm sworn to secrecy already! :laugh: )How much money you looking to spend? And I won't bust your balls about going AMD, especially if it's free. I just came from an X2 6400+ to my Q6600, but it took a lot of cash, and honestly, there's very little difference in gaming. But encoding, multi-tasking, and benchmarking abilities skyrocketed. So if gaming is the main concern, you're fine. Just don't expect to top any bench charts.

[Mussels]

How much money you looking to spend? And I won't bust your balls about going AMD, especially if it's free. I just came from an X2 6400+ to my Q6600, but it took a lot of cash, and honestly, there's very little difference in gaming. But encoding, multi-tasking, and benchmarking abilities skyrocketed. So if gaming is the main concern, you're fine. Just don't expect to top any bench charts.

yeah AMD can certainly come out in value if one of the parts was free :P

I dont know the current AM2 boards that well, but i suggest getting an AM2+ one so that IF the quad cores get fixed, you can get one later.

[RottnJP]

Yeah, gaming's my main thing anyway- a bit of CAD and database stuff when working from home, so the quad would be nice, but not critical. I'm really too cheap (er, "frugal") for crossfire to matter. I've got an XTX1900 512, which is still a step up from the 7800 GTX currently running in my FX-55 rig. (Hey, laugh all u want, but my rig kicked major a$$ back when BF2 cam out! LOL)

[btarunr]

Yeah, gaming's my main thing anyway- a bit of CAD and database stuff when working from home, so the quad would be nice, but not critical. I'm really too cheap (er, "frugal") for crossfire to matter. I've got an XTX1900 512, which is still a step up from the 7800 GTX currently running in my FX-55 rig. (Hey, laugh all u want, but my rig kicked major a$$ back when BF2 cam out! LOL)

Since you're into CAD and non-gaming demanding applications in general, let me add that the Athlon64 line processors even today churn out some of the highest in scientific applications' benchmarks. I've read it in a lot of reviews.