Refine search for CPUs and Memory

  Leave a comment      Email TrustedReviews Newsletters

There is no question that the Core 2 Extreme QX6850 is the fastest desktop processor available to buy at the moment. It either leads or is a close second in all of the benchmarks we’ve used here, which speaks volumes about the chip’s consistently strong performance characteristics. That performance unfortunately comes at a cost though and it’s out of most people’s reach.

If you’re a quad-core convert, the more affordable options for most are the Core 2 Quad Q6700 or Core 2 Quad Q6600 chips that cost around £300 and £160 respectively. Arguably the more compelling buy is the Q6600, because it’s literally a quarter of the price of the QX6850 but has a similar, albeit slightly slower, performance characteristic.

With regard to the new 1,333MHz FSB dual-core processors, it’s fair to say that Intel has not only maintained its current dominance in the CPU market, but also extended its performance lead in the mainstream. That, by and large, is thanks to the quite ridiculous price cuts that come into effect on July 22nd. They’re ridiculous because they’re so massive, but then AMD’s various price avalanches have been at least equal to Intel’s.

Obviously, lower prices are good for the consumer and it’s something that Intel can stomach – the question is how much longer can AMD go on like this?

Well, Barcelona isn’t all that far away with its launch expected in August and although that’s a server processor, we’ve been told that the desktop version of the chip, Phenom, will launch around a month after Barcelona. The question is whether AMD can get the processor clocked high enough to not only compete with Intel at the high-end, but also at the lower price points too.

Now that Intel has lowered the price of its slowest quad-core processor to around £160 (inc. VAT), AMD has already got a price war on its hands even before its quad-core processors have launched and the chips apparently won’t ship for at least a month after launch. We’re hoping that Phenom’s performance will blow us away and make it worth the wait, but the problem at the moment is that Phenom is essentially an unknown quantity. While waiting for Phenom, will enthusiasts be able to resist the lure of Intel’s Core 2 Quad Q6600.

Obviously, the question that I’m sure is on most people’s minds at the moment is whether you should opt for the Q6600 or the E6850, which are both at similar price points. Personally, I would opt for the quad-core processor every time, but that’s because I’m quite a heavy multi-tasker and I often find myself short of processing time on a dual-core processor. I like to continue what I’m doing when I’m running a processor intensive task and, since most applications will load up no more than two cores, you’ll still have cores to spare.

Add this to the fact that there are a slew of games coming out in the future that will benefit from quad-core – Crysis is the first, and from what we’ve heard there are plenty more in the pipeline too. In recent times, games haven’t really benefitted from high processor clock speeds because they’re graphics limited rather than CPU limited. This trend is going to continue, but as games engines get more complex, more will need to be done at any given point in time – that’s where quad-core processors will really come into their own.

Verdict

Intel’s new Core 2 Extreme QX6850 is the fastest processor available at the moment and that is unlikely to change in the short term. Unfortunately, that title comes at a great cost – unless you’ve got £600+ burning a hole in your pocket, this isn’t the processor for you. On the other hand, if you don’t feel the need for a quad-core CPU, the “mainstream” E6850 and E6750 processors represent good value for money. Personally, I think the current best bang for buck processor is Intel’s Core 2 Quad Q6600 which, at around £160 (inc. VAT) is mighty tempting.

Add your comment