Need help deciding which Dual/Quad Core

[doveman]

I've decided on a Gigabyte P35(C)-DS3R (the C model supports DDR2 and DDR3, which I'm thinking might be useful in the future if DDR3 becomes cheaper than DDR2).

What I can't decide on is which processor to stick in it. I'm looking at:

E4500 (2.2Ghz) 2MB 800FSB £75
E8400 (3.0Ghz) 6MB 1333FSB (about £130)
Q6600 (2.4GHz) 8MB 1066FSB £152

This machine is mainly going to be for Cubase/VST music production (only a hobby), so it would be able to make use of a Quad core and although I'm trying to keep costs as low as possible, my gut instinct is that it would be daft to get the E4500 instead of the Q6600.

The other question is are there any good reasons to get the E8400, when I could get the Q6600 for £22 more? Whatever processor I get, I'd like to overclock it and I intend to cool it with a Ninja and 120mm Nexus fan.

Throwing RAM into the equation, would it be better to get the E4500 and 4GB RAM or one of the more expensive CPUs and 2GB RAM?

[lm]

DDR3:
2 x 1.5V DDR3 DIMM sockets supporting up to 4 GB of system memory
Dual channel memory architecture
Support for DDR3 1333/1066/800 MHz memory modules
DDR2:
4 x 1.8V DDR2 DIMM sockets supporting up to 8 GB of system memory(Note 1)
Dual channel memory architecture
Support for DDR2 1200 (O.C.)/1066/800/667 MHz memory modules

Just like any other desktop board, 8GB DDR2 max. So maxing your memory capacity out right now with 800MHz costs you about $200.

So you can basically go out and max that right away.

But only 4GB of DDR3 possible, and knowing that the cpu you gonna get has pretty much cache and an architecture that really doesn't benefit so much from uber fast ram, what's the point?

I'd say just get regular DDR2 mobo and max it out right away. Or if you are really cheap, go with 2*2GB first and add the rest later.

Remember that the 45nm quad cores are coming during the first quarter of the year, and they eat much less juice than Q6600, so your best bet might be to use any FREE cpu that you or your friends have laying around, until you can get a 45nm quadcore.

[wim]

The other question is are there any good reasons to get the E8400, when I could get the Q6600 for £22 more? Whatever processor I get, I'd like to overclock it and I intend to cool it with a Ninja and 120mm Nexus fan.

yes. E8400 is newer, manufactured on the 45nm process with intel fancy new metal gate transistor things , which apparently have lower current leakage (for us this means lower power loss and quieter cooling). Q6600 is the older 65nm tech and eats significantly more power, so it's going to be harder to keep cool silently which is necessary for a music production machine

[Mats]

I totally agree with lm. The price for a 2 GB stick is very close to the price of 2 x 1 GB sticks. Just wait until you have money for the CPU you want AND 2 x 2 GB. You just can't go wrong there, and DDR2 will probably not get cheaper (see link).
If you really can't wait, don't buy 2 x 1 GB just to ensure dual channel until you have more money. It's better to buy one 2 GB stick now, and another one later on.

DDR2 pricing:
http://cens.com/cens/html/en/news/news_inner_22167.html

[doveman]

Thanks for the advice so far.

I could get the non-C Gigabyte board but it's only a couple of pounds cheaper, so it might be worth paying that to hedge my bets. It's just that I've noticed over the years that once newer memory becomes mainstream, the older stuff tends to go up in price quite a bit, so if at some point in the future my DDR2 became faulty, by then it might be cheaper to replace it with DDR3.

Really cheap? Moi? Well, yes actually I am, so I'll settle for 2*2GB sticks to begin with

Any idea how much a 45nm version of the Q6600 will cost when it comes out, because I am trying to avoid spending loads? If I can afford one, I might as well wait till they come out. Otherwise, notwithstanding wim's points about the 65nm chips being harder to cool quietly, would this not be possible with a Ninja and 120mm Nexus?

Whilst I would like to overclock, I realise this might not be possible to do quietly with a 65nm part but I imagine that a Q6600 at stock would still be considerably more powerful for the sorts of things I'd be using it for than any overclocked 45nm Dual core 45nm.

[walkingjohn]

I always want to ask: is the hobby audio or computers or both?

Athlon X2 3600+, underclocked to 800MHz, 1G ram, WinXP: N-track and Reason (drum machine, sequencer, and synth) use only about 7-20% of one core--Firefox and system processes contributing to that.

Cheap computer, better sound gear/plugins, or sweet computer, basic outboard gear? The former will make better recordings by far--but might not be as fun to tinker with, game with, etc.

You should be able to build a whole system for the price of a quad core, and make amazing noises with it. YMMV.

[doveman]

Well, both really.

The main point is that I'm not going to be doing professional productions for clients that might require loads of realtime processing plugins at the same time. Having said that, I want to use Cubase with various VST instruments and FXs and some processing, which all add up to stress the processor more than Reason does.

I do want to game with it at some point as well, although I'm not planning to spend loads on a graphics card.

[Mats]

What you're asking for is the 45 nm Q9300, review here in german.
It costs €16 more than the Q6600, but that's because it's not in stock yet.
They have the same list price at Intel.

[doveman]

That's good news. I'll definately wait then.

Although no doubt when they do come out, I'll be tempted to see if there's any good deals on the Q6600

[snoopygum]

I can never understand the logic behind a DDR2/3 combo motherboard. DDR3 price is still so much more $$$ than DDR2. By the time DDR3 is cheaper than DDR2, it's probably time to upgrade the system with a new CPU & motherboard anyways.

[Mats]

Here's a X4 review comparing it to the Q6600 with the Q9300 in the benchmarks.
System power consumption included.

Code: Select all

                          Idle	 100% Load
AMD Phenom 9600           205 W   290 W
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600	185 W   266 W
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300	175 W   234 W