Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Vs. Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200

Có thể bạn quan tâm

Menu Log in Sign up

Home
Forums
Intel
Intel CPUs

#1 · Jul 5, 2009 Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz, 1066FSB 8MB cache, 65nm Vs. Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 2.33GHz, 1333FSB 4MB cache, 45nm The 6600 seems to have slightly more Hz, to be specific 0.07Ghz, which I don't care about. But the 8200 has 13333FSB against the 6600 has 1066FSB. And last but not least the 8200 only has 4MB of cache while 6600 8MB. Which on would you pick? I suspect most are going to say 6600 since my mission is to overclock and 65nm will probably be better, plus the cache, but for some reason they cost the same.. does the FSB matter that much?.. And how high could I OC both of them with air? Sort by Oldest first Oldest first Newest first Most reactions #2 · Jul 5, 2009 Q8200, it's 45nm has a faster FSB. It's also newer technology so you may have more chance of RMA'ing it or warranting it in the future? #3 · Jul 5, 2009 Ideally, pick the q6000 especially for OC purspose. The 8200 is a 45nm chip but only 7x and 4mb cache. Don't stress to much on stock fsb once you oc them. The lower stock fsb will do higher fsb as oc process. In order to do 3.5G, board must do 500Mhz. Not many boards can do so not to mention the pressures on NB. With that says, this doesn't mean I totally agaisnt q8200. It needs to factor in 45nm chip and price etc. #4 · Jul 5, 2009 Aight thanks a lot for the reply. But how many multipl. does the 6600 have? Although I might end up by buying the 8200 since I just got it offered for half price lol.. And a bummer just hit me.. I think my board is only capable of 400MHz.. but I'm not sure since I know I can go higher on my E6420 and if the 6420 got 8x, I'm already running 400MHz. And tell me, either my memory is a little bit cranky (memory in my head) but I think I once saw in the bios that I could go from 200-600MHz, could that be right? @ work atm, so I cant check.. #5 · Jul 5, 2009 Quote:

Originally Posted by daanielin View Post

Aight thanks a lot for the reply. But how many multipl. does the 6600 have? Although I might end up by buying the 8200 since I just got it offered for half price lol.. And a bummer just hit me.. I think my board is only capable of 400MHz.. but I'm not sure since I know I can go higher on my E6420 and if the 6420 got 8x, I'm already running 400MHz. And tell me, either my memory is a little bit cranky (memory in my head) but I think I once saw in the bios that I could go from 200-600MHz, could that be right? @ work atm, so I cant check..

Q6600 has a 9x multi. The Q6600 is actually the better CPU as it overclocks a fair bit better. BUT if you can get the Q8200 for half price, then i would go for that

#6 · Jul 5, 2009 That's why I said that it needs to factor in price. The Q6600 has 9x multi. If the q6600 can do 3.5G, then the board only needs 389 fsb (3500=389x9), which most boards can do but in order to get 3.5G on q8200, board must do 500Mhz, which not many boards can do. There are some general OC thread on intel section, you can take a look at them. Kingston usually OC not that good. In Q8200 case, under 1:1 ratio of cpu and ram, the ram needs 2 x 500 = 1000MHz. That's pretty big task for Kingston ram. #7 · Jul 5, 2009 Q6600 for overclocking easily and big time. 8200 for small overclocks and bettter cooling, perf at stock from the 45nm advantage. #8 · Jul 5, 2009 Thank you both for fast reply and good information. Slinkey123: I most likely will unless I'll also get the 6600 and such a good price.

linskingdom: Yea, after takin a good look at the facts, the 6600 would suit me perfectly, since I wouldn't need to OC the memory that much. BUT, I already sold the Kingston memory, just waiting for the man to pick it up and than I'll most likely get OCZ Blade PC2-8500 1066MHz, so I'll hopefully be safe with those. http://www.tolvutek.is/product_info....ducts_id=20049 How high you think I'll be able to clock 8200 with these? --- EDIT --- Isn't the only difference between these blades and the LV blades extra heat? Or do the LV support anything else better? #9 · Jul 5, 2009 Q8200 has a lower multi so the fsb of your mobo is what will be limiting your overclock..not sure how sensitive the q8200 is on volts but you pump a crap load through the q66 and it will laugh at you. #10 · Jul 5, 2009 Since you say that you can get the Q8200 for half price, that right there is the answer. But I'll have to ask, how much is half price? If it weren't for the price, I'd go with the Q6600 for the reasons mentioned above. I'm sure that the ip35-e can do 400fsb and possibly a little more than that. Although it's a better mb, I have an ip35-pro that did over 415fsb on a quad. I never tested it any higher, but i'm sure that it could do more than that. Maybe not 500fsb but it could do a decent amount. #11 · Jul 5, 2009 Quote:

Originally Posted by waqasr View Post

Q8200 has a lower multi so the fsb of your mobo is what will be limiting your overclock..not sure how sensitive the q8200 is on volts but you pump a crap load through the q66 and it will laugh at you.

Yea, I noticed from earlier answers, but is there any chance that my board can run it at 500MHz x 7? Also I'm getting a little bit confused. FSB, isn't that what I raise to get more Hz from the CPU? Eg. I multipl. the FSB, 500 x 7 = 3.5GHz? And is there any chance that my limit is 600?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikecdm View Post

Since you say that you can get the Q8200 for half price, that right there is the answer. But I'll have to ask, how much is half price? If it weren't for the price, I'd go with the Q6600 for the reasons mentioned above. I'm sure that the ip35-e can do 400fsb and possibly a little more than that. Although it's a better mb, I have an ip35-pro that did over 415fsb on a quad. I never tested it any higher, but i'm sure that it could do more than that. Maybe not 500fsb but it could do a decent amount.

They both cost about 30.000 isk, 127 isk = $1, so they each cost about $240 @ Iceland. I can for some reason get the 8200 for half price since its the last one they got or something, so thats about $120.. And when I was raising some Mhz for the multipl. it minimum was 200Mhz, and maximum was 600Mhz, what is that 600Mhz limit that I'm talking about, and where is this 400FSB limit you guys have been talking about..

#12 · Jul 5, 2009 For the price difference, if you really want a quad, I'd go with the Q8200. If you don't need or want a quad all that bad, I'd keep the E6420. Most likely, you will be able to clock the E6420 higher than the Q8200 simply because of the higher multi. The Q6600 should be able to do 3.4ghz fairly easy, but then again, it costs twice as much as the Q8200. If don't need 4 cores that bad, you can save some money and buy an aftermarket cooler and try to see if you can push the E6420 any higher. The 400fsb is not there phsyically, meaning that the motherboard won't allow it. It just comes down to the limitations of the mb under certain conditions. It's not set in stone that it cannot reach 400fsb. It's just the quad cores put more stress on the chipset and make it difficult to reach higher fsb. With that being said, I'm sure that the mb can go well over 400fsb. It probably won't reach 500fsb, but it should do over 400fsb. On a dual core it can probably reach 500fsb and maybe even more. Quad cores just put more stress on the motherboard. #13 · Jul 5, 2009 Yea that is the thing, I don't actually need the Quad, but since I can get it at such a good price I was thinking about trying it out..

I was always going to aim at 4.0GHz with my 6420, so the question is, which one is better? E6420 @ 4GHz (if I'd be able to hit 500 x 8) = 8.0GHz Or Q8200 @ 2.9GHz (if I'd be able to hit 420 x 7) = 11.6GHz Both have 4MB of L2 cache. #14 · Jul 5, 2009 Just red that I can get the 8200 up to about 3.6GHz (515 x 7) asap I catch a new memory chips. Blade incoming. http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=553171 #15 · Jul 5, 2009 Quote:

Originally Posted by daanielin View Post

Just red that I can get the 8200 up to about 3.6GHz (515 x 7) asap I catch a new memory chips. Blade incoming. http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=553171

I dont think you will be getting over 500 fsb with that board. Also memory doesn't really effect overclocking the CPU unless its terrible ram. But kingston 800mhz is fine. When you up the FSB to overclock the CPU you must remember to change the memory clocks back down to 800mhz. Because everytime you change the FSB you will be changing the ram speed too. #16 · Jul 6, 2009 How can I change the memory to 800MHz? From my exsperience it just goes higher if I tune up the FSB.. #17 · Jul 6, 2009 Quote:

Originally Posted by daanielin View Post

How can I change the memory to 800MHz? From my exsperience it just goes higher if I tune up the FSB..

Is this ip35-e? It will be lucky if you can get 450 on that board.I think you can do it under the SoftMenu Setup menu in BIOS. As you change the fsb, you change x - DRAM Speed (CPU vs DRAM) Default <--- select the one value. x - DDR2 Voltage 1.80V<--- may need to add tiny voltage if it needs. #18 · Jul 6, 2009 I don't think you can get 500FSB using a P35 board. I got 425 or 430 stable on a P35. Little more 3 GHz. This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread. Insert Quotes Post Reply

28M posts
551K members
Since 2004

A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more! Show Less Full Forum Listing Explore Our Forums Intel CPUs NVIDIA PC Gaming Water Cooling AMD