Hey Jow Forums I am building a computer out of some old parts I have laying around. My choices for processor are
Core 2 Duo E8400 (2x 3ghz)
Core 2 Quad Q6600 (4x 2.4ghz)
Which one would you use? And why?
Hey Jow Forums I am building a computer out of some old parts I have laying around. My choices for processor are
Hunter Barnes
Chase Smith
quad, quad
Benjamin Parker
with a decent motherboard that Q6600 should have no difficulty hitting 3.4Ghz+
Jaxon Edwards
Quad Q6600, 4 cores is preferable, more physical threads, more virtual threads. Being 600mhz slower (probably) won't make much difference.
I might be totally wrong though, see what everybody else says
Jordan Harris
Q6600, that shit OC's 66% on average
Even without OC it's faster than the E8400 in most workloads nowadays
Josiah Gomez
There's no Core 2 with HT, HT didn't make a comeback until the first Core i series
Anthony Cox
Camden Watson
any mobo can make that thing hit 4-5ghz desu
David Wood
But for how long? I live my life longer than a quarter second at a time.
Ethan Brown
Lol, for an instant maybe.
I ran a Q6600 for 8 years.
Brandon Hughes
>I ran a Q6600 for 8 years.
At what ghz?
Isaac Cruz
4.4Ghz for many years and eventually had to back it down to 3.8Ghz for 24/7 stability.
Various coolers, ending on a CLC from corsair.
Thomas Cook
Grab an x5450
Brody Allen
Not compatible with my board unfortunately. Tried it already
David Butler
You use the Core 2 Quad Q6600 because:
- It can run GTA V somewhat
- It has 4 cores
-Can stream youtube at higher than 480p
William Anderson
I was running youtube at 1080p just fine on a Core 2 Duo 1.8ghz and GT710 on Manjaro XFCE.
Brayden Price
by golly i must have been using a shit browser
btw gl hf with GT 710. Surprisingly overclockable, unsurprisingly shit
Cooper Edwards
>btw gl hf with GT 710. Surprisingly overclockable, unsurprisingly shit
>Great video performance (haven't pushed it past 1080p
>Really lackluster gayming performance
Cost me $35, im not too bothered.
Josiah Hall
3 x 2 = 6
2.4 x 4 = 9.6
The q6600 is about 30% faster
Christian Wood
Duo fur freedum
Quad for games
Stallman has spoken
Nicholas Diaz
q66 oc was the weapon of choice back in the day
Ryder Cooper
What's the board?
Isaac Gomez
GA-965G-DS3 Rev 1
Liam Powell
>GA-965G-DS3 Rev 1
Yeah, that board only supports 65nm, that may be why. The X5365 or X5355 might work, quad cores at 2.87GHz-3GHz but it'll downclock the FSB to 1066MHz.
I would go the quad otherwise.
Anthony Gray
>I don't know how to decode video with my GPU: the post
My P7350 has no problem playing VP9 at 720p60. It's just a matter of using hardware video decoding.
Adam Clark
My Core Duo T2400 can do VP9@720p, even 1080p24
The 945G iGP sure as hell can't do anything higher than 720p without framedrops
Any acceptable C2D can do software decoding well enough
Benjamin Diaz
My Atom 330 with Nvidia ION can do 1080P @ 30FPS.
Video needs jack shit for decoding unless you are using h265 10bit @ 4K
Thomas Evans
(heiled)
I'm still running Q9550@3,4niggahertz
Daniel Wilson
team Q6600 reporting in, that shit was fucking great
Gabriel Gomez
cpubenchmark.net
The E8400 is going to have better single-thread perf, but for anything but gaming the extra cores are better.
Anthony Price
quad for Moar Cores (TM)
Henry Torres
>Any acceptable C2D can do software decoding well enough
>raping your CPU just to watch fucking video
Even the weakest dedicated GPU should be able to do better than this.
Dylan Edwards
You should try to get a Penryn Xeon.
Julian Smith
I had both of these exact CPUs in two different machines and vastly preferred the Q6600, I still have that particular machine around as a file server while I sold the E8400 one years ago. Mostly just used that one for older games like FO3/NV and Stalker.
I stream full HD Youtube fine on an X200 (forget which CPU but it's still an ancient mobile C2D). Either of those will be more than enough for Youtube.