Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Massive Price Cuts
by Anand Lal Shimpi on July 16, 2007 3:04 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
A Plan of Attack
In our E6750 preview we demonstrated that the 1333MHz FSB basically offered no tangible performance improvement over previous 1066MHz chips. That fact, combined with Intel's aggressive pricing of 1333MHz FSB parts helped us do a little cleaning up in today's charts - let's look at the contenders.
Quad Core
The quad core lineup in today's review is straightforward, we've got Intel's four quad-core offerings (including the latest QX6850) and AMD's dual dual-core FX-74 setup:
| CPU | Clock Speed | FSB | L2 Cache | Pricing |
| Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 | 3.00GHz | 1333 | 4MBx2 | $999 |
| Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 | 2.93GHz | 1066 | 4MBx2 | $999 |
| AMD Athlon 64 FX-74 | 3.0GHz | HT | 1MBx2 | $599/pair |
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 | 2.66GHz | 1066 | 4MBx2 | $530 |
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 | 2.40GHz | 1066 | 4MBx2 | $266 |
Price-wise, the only AMD/Intel competition we have here is between the FX-74 and the Q6700. Do keep in mind that as the FX-74 is a dual-socket configuration, the motherboard is a bit more expensive than what you can use with any of the single-socket quad-core Intel solutions.
And you read right, $266 can get you four amazingly fast cores on a single chip with the Q6600 after July 22nd.
Dual Core
| CPU | Clock Speed | L2 Cache | Pricing |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 | 3.00GHz | 4MB | $266 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 | 2.66GHz | 4MB | $183 |
| AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ | 3.0GHz | 1MBx2 | $178 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 | 2.33GHz | 4MB | $163 |
| AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ | 2.8GHz | 1MBx2 | $157 |
Above $200, AMD has nothing to offer, so the E6850 actually ends up competing with other Intel offerings. Do you go with a dual core E6850 or a quad-core Q6600 for the same $266 price tag? Below $200 we have a couple of interesting matchups: the E6750 vs. the 6000+ and the E6550 vs. the 5600+.
We're working on a lower cost CPU comparison where we'll address the sub-$150 offerings from both camps.
The Laundry List
We're trying to answer the following questions today:
1) Does the 1333MHz FSB have any impact on quad-core performance?
2) Is AMD's Athlon 64 FX-74 competitive with Intel's cheaper Core 2 Quad Q6700?
3) At approximately $180, which is faster: AMD's Athlon 64 X2 6000+ or Intel's Core 2 Duo E6750?
4) At approximately $160, which is faster: AMD's Athlon 64 X2 5600+ or Intel's Core 2 Duo E6550?
5) For $266, should you buy a quad-core Core 2 Quad Q6600 or a dual-core Core 2 Duo E6850?
Let's get to it.
Test Configuration
| CPU: | AMD Athlon 64 FX-74 (3.0GHz/1MBx2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ (3.0GHz/1MBx2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ (2.8GHz/1MBx2) Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 (3.00GHz/1333MHz) Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 (2.93GHz/1066MHz) Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 (2.66GHz/1066MHz) Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz/1066MHz) Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.00GHz/1333MHz) Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 (2.66GHz/1333MHz) Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 (2.33GHz/1333MHz) |
| Motherboard: | Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R (Intel P35) ASUS M2N32-SLI Deluxe (nForce 590 SLI) |
| Chipset: | Intel P35 NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI |
| Chipset Drivers: | Intel 8.1.1.1010 (Intel) Integrated Vista Drivers (NVIDIA) |
| Hard Disk: | Seagate 7200.9 300GB SATA |
| Memory: | Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 (1GB x 2) |
| Video Card: | NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA ForceWare 158.18 |
| Desktop Resolution: | 1600 x 1200 |
| OS: | Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
68 Comments
View All Comments
xsilver - Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - link
One question has still yet to be answered:how far does the e6850 overclock vs how far the q6600 overclocks
from previous articles the q6600 doesnt reach much beyond 3ghz unless you have supercooling?
but the e6850?
Slash3 - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
I know this is a bit after the fact, but would it be possible on the "vs" charts, to plot the negative performance improvements (read: performance loss) in a left-of-center fashion, instead of having both extending to the right of zero, with a negative sign tacked on? It makes it pretty difficult to scan visually. Go from -100 to 0 to +100 in the same X axis, and just increase the granularity a bit to fit things on, in cases where there are significant negative values. The E6850 vs Q6600 is a good example. Negative and positive, all over the place. Just friendly commentary. Excellent writeup, otherwise. :)DerekWilson - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
as was explored in a previous video artilce, we could simply add 100 to each of these and compare the bars with 100 percent meaning eqivalent performance. negatives would be less than 100 while positives would be greater than 100 ...personally, i don't mind the negaive numbers in a different color paradigm. if the readers would prefer the "centered at 100%" style, we will certainly adapt.
i don't know how the other editors here feel, but marketing guys like to show us graphs around 100% performance of something ... because of that, it just ends up feeling wrong to me. :-)
dev0lution - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
No red lines? That's a pretty impressive lineup for the prices Intel has. Looks like there might be Q6600 in my future very soon :)tuteja1986 - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
where is this price cut.. i don't seem em in newegg.webdawg77 - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
July 22ndDerekWilson - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
fixed the red lines issueThatguy97 - Thursday, June 18, 2015 - link
back then i stuck to dual core with my e6600 going all the way up to 4ghz ish speeds