Best processor

[rodgerse]

I'm wonder whats the best,fastest x86 processor on the market.To me, it seems the core 2 extreme seems to be really the fastest processor available.

But is it worth it?.most versions are like $1000+, really, just for a cpu?:eek:.Even the core 2 duo and relatively comparable athlons are 1,2, maybe 300, so just how "extreme" is it?.Or could it not actually nesesserally be the fastest anyways?.

[ASharp]

I think the whole "extreme edition" thing Intel is putting out is just a waste of money. They have good performance but, for a fraction of the price you can get a CPU that performs just as well if not better. I don't know the exact differences between the processors but for hundreds of dollars less, you can get a perfectly good E6750 for $200 or a Q6600 for about $275-ish. They'll perform just about on par with the extreme edition CPUs which go for $1000+.

Even if the extreme edition processors are more powerful, it's nothing a little overclocking can't change. ;)

[board123]

The best processor is usually the most expensive one.

[rodgerse]

.

[divx]

you don't need rfd to find the best processor, just goto tomshardware and pick the top one from their latest chart

[rodgerse]

you don't need rfd to find the best processor, just goto tomshardware and pick the top one from their latest chart

Hey, I'm sure if I was a millionaire that'd be fine, but I don't need to spend a fortune on the BEST of the best.though a comprehensive comparison of most cpu performance is good ,atleast for curiosity.

[divx]

Hey, I'm sure if I was a millionaire that'd be fine, but I don't need to spend a fortune on the BEST of the best.though a comprehensive comparison of most cpu performance is good ,atleast for curiosity.

your question was "I'm wonder whats the best,fastest x86 processor on the market", tomshardware would give you the latest update on that

as for best price/performance/future wise, it is the Q6600

[board123]

Hey, I'm sure if I was a millionaire that'd be fine, but I don't need to spend a fortune on the BEST of the best.though a comprehensive comparison of most cpu performance is good ,atleast for curiosity.
You should rephrease your question then...


I'm wonder whats the best,fastest x86 processor on the market.

[Silver Bullet]

Right now the best chip is the QX9650 (3Ghz. $1200), it's based on the new 45nm "Penryn" die shrink of the current C2D/Q family. It overclocks like no tomorrow and runs cooler than the current 65nm chips. Think around 4Ghz on good air cooling if not more like 4.5Ghz (if you're lucky).

Now with that said a whole new set of 45nm chips will be launch in January (to go along with the QX9650) with the sweet spot being the Q9450 (2.66Ghz, 1333FSB and 12MB of cache) it should only cost about $300CND and should overclock just as well as the current QX9650 for about 1/4 the price.

If you want to wait that little bit longer you might want to pickup a new QX9770 (3.2Ghz, $1200+) with is based on the 45nm "Penryn" setup but with the advantage of a 1600mhz FSB instead of the usual 1333mhz FSB. You can only use "offically" a X48 chipset based board, though I've heard that Asus and possibliy other have their X38 based boards working with this chip.

If you must by right now I'd say go for the current Q6600 (2.4Ghz, $275, 65nm), if not then wait it out for the Q9450.

I hope that pretty much spells it out for you :)

Current Leaderboard:
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/3023/3dmark06cpuaq2.png
Source: Tomshardware - QX9770 Preview (http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/19/intel_core_2_extreme_qx9770/index.html)

[Oversized Rooster]

Now with that said a whole new set of 45nm chips will be launch in January (to go along with the QX9650) with the sweet spot being the Q9450 (2.66Ghz, 1333FSB and 12MB of cache) it should only cost about $300CND and should overclock just as well as the current QX9650 for about 1/4 the price.

You are speaking my language! Totally agree with that being the sweet spot. I'm personally waiting to get my hands on a Q9450.

[rodgerse]

your question was "I'm wonder whats the best,fastest x86 processor on the market", tomshardware would give you the latest update on that

as for best price/performance/future wise, it is the Q6600

I said the fastest and the best, as in the best one to buy, speed is a secondary thing.

[rodgerse]

Current Leaderboard:
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/3023/3dmark06cpuaq2.png
Source: Tomshardware - QX9770 Preview (http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/19/intel_core_2_extreme_qx9770/index.html)

Actually, that chart is very misleading, there comparing quad and dual core processors, not to mention they only overclocked the highest ones.Abviously packing x amount of cores and pushing it to extreme levels will make you the faster processor.In that sense, I don't think the extreme (quad core) is that much better than duo, sure, packing infinity amount of cores will give you cheap performance upgrade, but at an exorborant price, what a rip-off.

Any place for comparison of cores themselves?,if possible.

[CodecX81]

Gonna go with divx here (as usual)

Q6600 is the best speed/price ratio.

and with some decent parts, you can clock it up to Q6700 speeds.. and save like $300

[Silver Bullet]

Actually, that chart is very misleading, there comparing quad and dual core processors, not to mention they only overclocked the highest ones.Abviously packing x amount of cores and pushing it to extreme levels will make you the faster processor.In that sense, I don't think the extreme (quad core) is that much better than duo, sure, packing infinity amount of cores will give you cheap performance upgrade, but at an exorborant price, what a rip-off.

It's not that the chart is misleading, of course quad core chips are going to do better in multi-threaded CPU intensive tasks than dual core chips. The chart should of course be taken with a gain of salt, but it does well to show the difference of dual vs quad.

How about this:

Remember: E6850 (2 x 3ghz) vs Q6600 (4 x 2.4Ghz)

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/9257/anandtechmn6.jpg
Source: Anantech - The Million Dollar Question: Dual or Quad Core for the Same Price? (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=8)

or

Remember: E6750 (2 x 3.6ghz) vs Q6600 (4 x 3.3Ghz)
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/4873/tabellee6750q6600occd5.gif
Source: Tomshardware - Overclocking: Dual- vs. Quad-Core CPUs (http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/08/dual_vs_quad/page20.html)

[Oversized Rooster]

If you're not into multi-threaded apps very much, then yeah - the E6850 would give you big performance. That's what I have right now - and unlike the Q, you do NOT need watercooling to get it 4GHz.

[rodgerse]

Is there a way of adding cores, or something in a way that directly makes them faster, so like doubling the speed of a cpu by adding the same one.I know now its only good for mulit-tasking as one task can't really use more than 1 core, but is there a way to split the task load?.

[Silver Bullet]

There is no way of "adding" cores are you have purchase a CPU.

More and more program do use more than one core at a time (as you can see by the graphs). If you main concern is currently gaming then dual core is fine for now, but next year I suspect quadcore be more helpful. As Oversized Rooster was saying .. dual core now .. and then new Q9450 early next year is probably your best bet.