quad core cpu question

[Parker]

Originally Posted by Capper

.....but you may have issues with the newer 45nm processors.

Where'd you hear that?

[frosty satan]

well i was thinking E8400 originally but like i dunno thought i might need to jump on the quad bandwagon, so i dont get outdated real quick or something

[Parker]

Well then I'd say stick with your E6320. Theres not really a point in upgrading unless your going to run more demanding programs.

[frosty satan]

it'd probably be mainly for games, but yeah i might just give OC another go for now. now that i have some free time, got it up to 2.39GHz kinda stable before

[Parker]

Originally Posted by frosty satan

it'd probably be mainly for games, but yeah i might just give OC another go for now. now that i have some free time, got it up to 2.39GHz kinda stable before

Nice, pump it up man!

[RangerXLT8]

Originally Posted by Parker

Well, from my point of view, I don't think it's necessary at all to upgrade to a quad. If you want to upgrade though, I'd suggest the E8400. That will out perform any Q6600, any day (if I'm not mistaken). It also gives out less heat than the Q6600 and is low power consuming.
(It's also cheaper!)

It really depends what applications you are running. Yes the E8400 is 3.0GHz dual core. However, a lower clocked Quad -core will spank it in applications that are multi-threaded. For instance a Crysis and CAll of Duty 4 will use 4 cores. Benchmarks such as 3DMark06, the quad will spank the E8400. Now in applications that do not utilize 4 cores, the E8400 will spank the quad.

Just for a comparison, a 4.3ghz E8400 scores roughly 3800marks in 3DMark06, where lower clocked 3.2ghz quad score about 4700. So it really depends on what programs we are talking about.

And in terms of the future, we are going to see more and more applications utilizing multi-cores.

To the OP I say go for a quad-core, maybe a Q9450 when they are released.

[Parker]

Ooohh, ok.
You are totally right about that Ranger. Didn't think about that stuff.

[gvblake22]

The Intel P965 chipset doesn't natively support 1333MHz FSB processors, which I believe all the 45nm chips are. Looking on Intel's website, they only list FSB compatibility for 1066, 800, and 533 MHz system bus speeds. So like Capper said, it's going to be spotty and depend on the specific motherboard and whether or not the manufacturer decided to add support for 1333MHz FSB processors.

[screwballl]

The gigabyte P965-DS3 supports them:

GIGABYTE Rev 3.3 P965 Series motherboards were designed to take full advantage of the blistering performance inherent in the new generation Intel Core™ 2 Duo processors featuring 1333MHz FSB.

It also states support for 65nm quad cores but nothing about 45nm...

[One4yu2c]

Going straight to the source, Gigabyte lists support for 45nm processors and 1333MHz FSB (through overclocking) using the F6G BIOS. The exception being the QX6850 on revision 2.0:

Gigabyte 965P-DS3P Revision 2.0 CPU Compatibility List
Gigabyte 965P-DS3P Revision 3.3 CPU Compatibility List

When in doubt, always check the manufacturer's CPU compatibility list for the motherboard model in question. You'll find that manufacturers keep that information pretty well updated.