Q9300 consume less power than Q6600, Thats really the only advantage of Q9300 have over Q6600.
Q9300 does perform slightly faster stock vs stock. It just about 5% faster. You won't notice the difference.
If you don't plan to overclock Q9300 would be better choice if it cost the same as Q6600
If you plan to overclock then Q6600 would be better because it doesn't have low multiplier like Q9300
The price drop for Q6700 and Q6600 is on April
I heard that Micro center is selling Q6600 for only $199, though.
Merkwürdigliebe;1329571 said:doods, what have you been smoking?
Q9300 = 7.5x
Q9400 = 8x (6MB L2 cache)
Q9450 = 8x (12MB L2 cache)
Q9550 = 8.5x
Q9650 = 9x
really gay IMO, it'll be hard for the average person to go over 3.2GHz with that measly 8x multiplier, and for $400... no thank you!
Just to put it into perspective, getting to 3.6GHz on a Q9450 will be the equivalent of getting 4GHz on a Q6600.
ya 4 tracers would look so awesome in a window case
i think you meant 4 x 1gb not 4 x 2gb
Check out this motherboard, it seems to be everyone loves it, and I am going to buy it.
Motherboard
DFI LANPARTY DK P35-T2RS LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard
Newegg.com - DFI LANPARTY DK P35-T2RS LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Price: $139.99
yeh the 520hx is a modular psu and i love mine. and also are you sure about an all acrylic case? i really debated getting one and decided against it only because i had too much stuff and couldn't do a good job on the wire management. but if you can do a good job with wire managemnt then by all means go for the case, i would hesitate to recommend it though. also you could go for a q6700, granted its twice as much as the q6600 but its got the 10x multiplier i believe so its a solid choice.