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
Pirks - Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - link
again, you're probably right if the silent PC is build with dual core CPU. in my case I've got single core CPU since I don't need any dual core functionality (I mostly play games like Doom 3 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.), and while dual cores from intel are very solid choice for silent PC - single cores from Intel pretty much suck. hence my choice of AMD San Diego single core chip - that chip turned out to be the best "price/performance/watt for gaming" ratio I could find on ebay :) again, this is all about single core CPUs. I have no idea how the picture looks for dualcores, probably Intel got stronger offer here - by the time I'm about to upgrade to dual core Phenom would be around and we'll see again who wins - AMD very often wins by better price, even when their CPUs are slightly inferior to Intel onesutube545 - Thursday, July 19, 2007 - link
Oh, STFU already, you dumb fanboyPirks - Thursday, July 19, 2007 - link
what, you forgot to put some lube on your blue intel dildo again?Zak - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
Looks like the Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.00GHz) is a decent pick for gaming machine until games take full advantage of quad-core CPU.Z.
jay401 - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
Or if you're a budget-conscious gamer, pick up an E4400 for less than half the price and run it at 3.0GHz/1333fsb (drop the multiplier to 9x) which seems to be a pretty common and easy oc with any motherboard capable of 1333fsb.Should show little or no performance difference considering the only hardware difference is it has half the cache which doesn't seem to impact games much if at all.
sprockkets - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
Yep, you want a nice fast platform, get Intel. But I've tested power usage of my Abit nview + 3800+ dual core 65nm processor from AMD, and it takes around 115 watts of energy at full load.I think nowadays either you get an ATX gaming system or now try to build the smallest and quietest and coolest mini itx system since they are powerful enough now for most.
bobbyto34 - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
Yeah for normal home usage, it is interessant to find the best power consumption/ price / performance Ratio.AMD X23800+ @ 65€ was an excellent bargain (good performances ingame, though not as good as C2D).
In some cases, you want only raw performance: usually for work, less time spent waiting, gives you more productivity. At work we have to treat 1gigabyte text files, so the E6700 rocks vs other stations we have (A64 3000+ or P4 3.2Ghz) !
kataras - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
Hello, just wanted to know is this the Core 2 Duo CPU which has no IHS (internal heatsink) on. Was it hard to remove it, do you need special tools? Did it decrease the temp significantly? I am asking this because i am thinking of either removing IHS or lapping my E6320 as it runs really hot indeed. i would be very pleased if you could answer my questions regarding IHS.Thanks
Ron
AMDfreak - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
You can find lots of info about removing the IHS over a the xtremesystems.org forums.microAmp - Monday, July 16, 2007 - link
"... whole 7MHz faster than its predecessor may..." on page 2. Should be 70Mhz faster.