from memory wen i had my quad, through the activity in task manager, the first core took mostly all of the background processors.
but i still agree it does come down the price perf. and q6600 is the best atm in that respect. just like nos said it might be a lil slower than a dual clocked higher, but you wont notice much difference at those speeds, and hopefully games will start using all four cores more effectivley.
Originally Posted by BonKerz
Well, as said before, the gaming future proof q66 would seem to be the better choice for a gaming rig, correct? How would the q66 65nm match up to the q9's 45nm structure? Would there be a performance difference worth the money there?
they are about 5-10% better i think (clock for clock) but the cheapest cuming in at about 380 (9450) its not worth since neither the 9450 or 9550 are as good as the q6600 for overclocking.