Merkwürdigeliebe
Benevolent Cake Despot
- Messages
- 1,733
- Location
- Montreal, CANADA
Re: q9300 vs q6600
I was referring to this part of the review: X-bit labs - The Youngest of Yorkfields: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Processor Review (page 9)
they tried it with different clock speeds
You can tell that those differences are margins of error, I mean, how the heck can a QX9770 perform worse than a Q9300... it just shows that there won't be much of a difference in gaming or gaming benchmarks
the difference in 3DMark06 for example, is less than 100, which is the margin of error...
when you can get a Q6600 or Q6700 for so much cheaper, unless you do encoding and the likes, what's the point? I'm still really pessimistic about the disappointing prices and multipliers of these new quads...
No, Q9300 outperformed it in all cases
Even though Q9300 have less cache, it performs better because of the architectural improvements introduced in Penryn processors, and having 100MHz higher clock speed
I was referring to this part of the review: X-bit labs - The Youngest of Yorkfields: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Processor Review (page 9)
they tried it with different clock speeds
You can tell that those differences are margins of error, I mean, how the heck can a QX9770 perform worse than a Q9300... it just shows that there won't be much of a difference in gaming or gaming benchmarks
the difference in 3DMark06 for example, is less than 100, which is the margin of error...
when you can get a Q6600 or Q6700 for so much cheaper, unless you do encoding and the likes, what's the point? I'm still really pessimistic about the disappointing prices and multipliers of these new quads...