Cheat Engine

Leena · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:56 pm Post subject: Q6600 or Q9300

They are both the same price. $179.99

Which one should I get? Thoughts and and facts please.

Karakawe · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:05 pm Post subject:

This is essentially a "Kentsfield vs Yorkfield" thing.
In this benchmark, at similar clocks, one of the lower-rated Yorkfield CPUs outperformed (if only by a little) the Q6600 in a number of benchmarks, while having a temperature of about 10C lower, due to its lower voltage. Some people prefer the Q6600 for (extreme) overclocking, but I say go with the Yorkfield.

Leena · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:12 pm Post subject:

Hmm. Its a hard decision.

Karakawe · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:29 pm Post subject:

Found another benchjoe. Here, a Q9300 (with half its L2 cache disabled, making it lower than the Q6600's) out-performs the Q6600 by up to 13% (After Effects CS3), with an advantage of 11.1% for H.264 video encoding, which looks good. They then proceeded to overclock the two cards, the Q6600 to 3.6GHz and the Q9300 to 3.5GHz and the Yorkfield won out in each test, while consuming less power than the Kentsfield.
I don't mean to be one-sided on this, but the Q9300 is cheap and offers the newer technology of the two.

EDIT:
Replace "joe" in link with "mark". >_>

Leena · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject:

Q9300 it is until someone proves me otherwise.

hcavolsdsadgadsg · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 4:04 pm Post subject:

Q9300 = higher FSB, which can make it harder to overclock unless you have some beastly RAM, and a motherboard that's up to the task of a potentially monumental FSB.

Leena · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 4:16 pm Post subject:

I don't think i will oc, unless it is really easy to do.

Konata Izumi · Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 4:36 pm Post subject:

get the q9300.

Niels8500 · Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:24 am Post subject:

I have the Intel Core2Quad Q9300 works great

iTz SWAT · Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:41 am Post subject:

SFP+ · Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 3:57 am Post subject:

hcavolsdsadgadsg · Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:20 am Post subject:

it's a 1333fsb chip.
compare that to the FSB on a Q6600 which is 1066

1066 / 4 = 266.5
266 * 9 = 2.4ghz
400 * 9 = 3.6ghz (ddr2 800 1:1)

1333 / 4 = 333.25
333.25 * 7.5 = 2.5ghz
400 * 7.5 = 3.0ghz (ddr2 800 1:1)

3600 / 7.5 = 480 fsb to hit 3.6 on a 1333 chip vs 400 on a 1066 chip.

Hassanity · Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 12:15 am Post subject:

9300 is an advanced model and will perform better.

Dark Byte · Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 1:19 am Post subject:

http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupID=29765 Q6600
http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=33922 Q9300

Q6600 has 2MB cache more
Q9300 is 100MHz (0.1GHz) faster

Q9300 has trusted computing build in (so blocks you from seeing certain memory)
Q6600 does not (so allows you to do what you want)

Sup3R C3r34L · Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 3:39 am Post subject:

I'd pick a Q6600 if you haven't already bought either, you will probably get it to a higher speed than the Q9300 even though it does run quite warm.
I had mine running up to 3.6Ghz in windows, now I'm using OS X I've lowered it to 3.2