Final Words

Despite theoretical showings on paper, the 1333MHz FSB appears to do very little for performance even when feeding four of Intel's fastest cores. The Core 2 Extreme QX6850's performance is nothing to scoff at, but given its price tag we'd strongly recommend one of the cheaper quad-core offerings. With the Q6600 coming in at $266, it's tough to resist.

Our Q6600 recommendation really highlights the major focus of this story, and that is the escalating price war between AMD and Intel. Once Intel's price cuts take effect next week, it's going to be difficult to recommend any AMD CPUs above $150. We're still working on our low end CPU comparison, and we suspect that AMD is more competitive at the lower end of the price spectrum, but what we've seen here today doesn't look good at all for the mainstream segment. In order to remain competitive, AMD would either have to knock about $50 off its X2 6000+ price or count on Phenom making up the performance gap at the same price point.

It's tough to resist upgrading or building a new system today because of the tremendous value this last round of price cuts has given us, especially when you take into account that both Penryn and Phenom's respective launches remain largely unknown. Clock speeds, pricing and dates are still up in the air, and for once our recommendation isn't simply to wait and see what happens.

If you need a new system or CPU upgrade today, the chips are ripe for the picking.

Gaming Performance
POST A COMMENT

68 Comments

View All Comments

  • mbf - Monday, July 23, 2007 - link

    I accidentally posted this in the comment section for the earlier article, but it seems to fit better here. Sadly I cannot delete the other comment...

    I've been wondering how older motherboards will work with the new FSB1333 processors. Specifically I'm interested how an ASUS P5W DH Deluxe without the latest BIOS would react to having e.g. an E6750 dropped in. ASUS claims support for FSB1333 processors for the P5W DH Deluxe as of 2205 beta.

    Would the system boot and run using a pre-2205 BIOS (although not at peak performance), so a BIOS upgrade can be performed? Or would the system fail to boot at all, like when the first Core 2 Duo processors surfaced and needed a BIOS upgrade to run at all on certain boards.

    The reason I ask this is that I've my eyes set specifically on that board (I have several reasons, ECC memory support being one of them). I had originally planned on getting an E6600 after the July 22 price cuts, but right now there's nearly no FSB1066 processor to be had locally. Also, I'd of course love to have a access to the latest processors in any case.
    Reply
  • number - Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - link

    Marvelous article. However, one benchmark is missing. Quad core processor may be used in the following way: two cores are working on a job that utilizes them to the max, while remaining two run a game. How well the processors fare under this scenario? Reply
  • strikeback03 - Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - link

    Was the Q6600 compared to the E6850 at stock speed, and not with the boost from setting 1333 FSB? Is it really 10% faster in CS3 than the 3GHz E6850 (and therefore a lot quicker than my E6600)? And would similar improvements carry over to CS2, or did they improve multicore support in the transition from CS2 to CS3? Reply
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - link

    quote:

    Despite theoretical showings on paper, the 1333MHz FSB appears to do very little for performance even when feeding four of Intel's fastest cores.


    Maybe you should also add scores of 1066MHz FSB on the P965 rather than showing 1066FSB on P35 only. Your earlier tests with P35 have shown that there is performance improvement just by moving from P965 to the P35 chipset. Moving to P35 showed greater improvements than changing P35's supporting CPU from 1066FSB to 1333FSB.
    Reply
  • Bozo Galora - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link

    http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31822/135/">http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31822/135/ Reply
  • Bozo Galora - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link

    (no edit button?)
    http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?p=...">http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?p=...
    Reply
  • scott967 - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link

    Seen various comments to "wait for G0" stepping coming out now or very soon. What stepping was used on this comparo and any comments on this stepping issue?

    scott s.
    .
    Reply
  • clairvoyant129 - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link

    I love how all these AMD proponents claim that Intel motherboards are too expensive. Then they claim the difference can buy them a much better video card.

    There are tons of cheap Intel motherboards that are just as good as comparable AMD motherboards.

    These fanboys are pathetic. Whats the next excuse?
    Reply
  • mamisano - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link

    Curious, anyone find these new Intel CPUs in stock, and if so are the prices in line with what has been listed? Reply
  • Bozo Galora - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link

    I have to agree this was a superb article. Well thought out and logical in all repects. Answers all buying questions from various angles.
    Of course, IBM's 300GHz CPU perhaps may make all this irrelevant - heh
    http://www.newtechspy.com/articles06/crystalcomput...">http://www.newtechspy.com/articles06/crystalcomput...

    While I am at it, the article on 32 bit addressing was also very clear and informative explaining the 4GB "wall", and the 2GB/2GB split. I am sure many on the web will make reference this article in the future.

    And the first power supply review was the third in this triad of superior investigation by the AT crew. Those graphs showing the PSU voltage vs wattage load are simply the best insight I've ever seen in a PSU review anywhere. Also interesting was the fact the Silverstone was advertised as a single 12V rail, but was in fact 4 separate.

    AT seems to be reinvigorated for some reason - kudu's to you, top notch work.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now