E6900 or E8000 ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorburn

The XE offers the ultimate performance for people who don't want to overclock or for those who want the extra flexibility to get the optimum performance from there system by being able to choose the most suitable combination of FSB and multiplier.

---

So you're saying if I want the best performance on a budget of oh say, $2000, I should go for the XE for $1200 and then have to dump my video cards into the toilet along with RAM quality/amount and hard drive speed/size? Yes, it is the ULTIMATE in performance for those who don't want to overclock, but for OC'ers, unless you're a hardcore bencher with tons of cash to throw at it, the XE is a poor choice. Most OC'ers don't have $5000 per rig to upgrade every few months to the next ubar-$1200 chip for 5% gain in system performance to grab those WR's.

I completely agree it's *THE BEST* chip for benchers, but saying it is "optimum" performance for those who want to be able to choose their multi, is bunk if you ask me. You will get the best optimum *system* performance by going for bang for the buck even on the higher-end of the spectrum such as the 2.4ghz-2.66ghz Conroe's, along with SLI video cards, instead of the XE with a single video card and slower RAM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LowRun

So very true but then again some people want every last drop of power higher multis could bring and they have the overclocked wallets to match, so why not?

---

Sure if you have the wallet to match it for every component in your system, go ahead if you want... it's your money! I can't say I wouldn't in that position :D! However, for most of the OC'ers on even these forums, we don't have huge wallets, and would rather get a lower CPU that will overclock to 90-95% of the performance, then use the extra money "saved" toward a second video card for SLI to whomp on what we could get if we went for the highest CPU and a single videocard.

GoldenTiger-
You're putting an awful lot of words into other peoples mouths. If you're on a budget, you don't buy the best chip, you spread you're money around. If you want the BEST performance using the BEST equipment, get a better job.

So much talk but nobody answered my question :doh:
Why 60x multi exist theoreticaly but its impossible practicaly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Orangeman

GoldenTiger-
You're putting an awful lot of words into other peoples mouths. If you're on a budget, you don't buy the best chip, you spread you're money around. If you want the BEST performance using the BEST equipment, get a better job.

---

LOL, if only it were so easy to do as it were to say ;). I wasn't putting words in people's mouths, I was commenting on WHAT THEY SAID.

I think the point was that we weren't talking about best with a budget. While you might not see the point in buying it (note: I don't think it's worth it for me), there is still a point to have it. I'd absolutely love to have an unlocked multi so I knew I wasn't being held back by my FSB. As mentioned before, you can have all parts of your system running at near their max.

PS -For $2000 the E6600 is the best choice IMO, I'll be buying it for sure. For $6000 I'd surely take the extreme. Not my wallet tho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burdman

I think the point was that we weren't talking about best with a budget. While you might not see the point in buying it (note: I don't think it's worth it for me), there is still a point to have it. I'd absolutely love to have an unlocked multi so I knew I wasn't being held back by my FSB. As mentioned before, you can have all parts of your system running at near their max.

PS -For $2000 the E6600 is the best choice IMO, I'll be buying it for sure. For $6000 I'd surely take the extreme. Not my wallet tho.

---

Oh, don't get me wrong, as I said, if you have the "overclocked wallet" by all means if you want it, get it... I just was trying to present a different viewpoint than "It exists, I need it NOW" :). It's not worth it *for me*, but I can see why it would be to others.

yea, if you're gonna spend that much for an E6900, just go XE. look at the benchmarks.... if a 3.37ghz Merom can hit 14 seconds on PI, think of what a processor that doesn't need to be overclocked could hit? You would dominate all benchmarks at stock, and after an overclock, you would own the fastest computer in the world

some news about 6900 ? no way to find some

don't forget HT2 on the X8000 ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freecableguy

don't forget HT2 on the X8000 ;)

---

any preview from it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freecableguy

don't forget HT2 on the X8000 ;)

---

Any confirmation on that? Is that the same as the 'multiplexing?'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idiotec

Any confirmation on that? Is that the same as the 'multiplexing?'

---

It`s Hyper-Threading 2nd gen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldenTiger

So you're saying if I want the best performance on a budget of oh say, $2000, I should go for the XE for $1200 and then have to dump my video cards into the toilet along with RAM quality/amount and hard drive speed/size? Yes, it is the ULTIMATE in performance for those who don't want to overclock, but for OC'ers, unless you're a hardcore bencher with tons of cash to throw at it, the XE is a poor choice. Most OC'ers don't have $5000 per rig to upgrade every few months to the next ubar-$1200 chip for 5% gain in system performance to grab those WR's.

I completely agree it's *THE BEST* chip for benchers, but saying it is "optimum" performance for those who want to be able to choose their multi, is bunk if you ask me. You will get the best optimum *system* performance by going for bang for the buck even on the higher-end of the spectrum such as the 2.4ghz-2.66ghz Conroe's, along with SLI video cards, instead of the XE with a single video card and slower RAM.

---

I have to say I totally agree with this.

Assuming a fixed budget, if it was a decision between an E6700 and Crossfire/SLI and X6800 and a single card - then for gaming at least the Xfire/SLI option would be clearly faster.

X6800 may be the fastest chip, but that doesn't automatically make any system with it as a component the "fastest system".

Obviously if your pockets are bottomless and you intended to buy the absolute best (read: most expensive) of everything then the X6800 would be a no-brainer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idiotec

Any confirmation on that? Is that the same as the 'multiplexing?'

---

have you some link relating that ?

btw, for the E8000, I thought intel held its release becuase AMD really had nothing to compete with a 1333mhz bus 4mb cache Conroe at 3.33 ghz so intel's just waiting for AMDs response and then they'll release the E8000

What a thread crapping. Anyone spending budget of $1000 or so on cpu doesn't build system for $2000 budget. Let's get real.
As for which one, my suggestion would be... wait and see.
If it is for serious benching, no reason to save $260 for a better chance (heavy benching involves going through many cpus quite often anyways). For 24x7, personally, unless you really have tall budget, those top end chips are bit pricey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massman

who needs x60 anyway ? :p

---

Um me....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlackX

So is it worth to pay 230$ more for E8000 as we get lower clock?

---

If you're going to go all out (WCing, ram, mobo, etc) then yes, if not then probably not :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by automagic

My take on this is why spend the big bucks on the XE when all you really get is bragging rights. Spend $300 on a 2.4 conroe, then oc it and you'll have a really fast machine. IMHO

---

Agreed. IMHO, it would make me feel much better OCing a lowly $340 E6600 to a crazy speed, than an $1000+ XE chip. I could probably get a phase change box for the difference in price alone.

I will probably just get E6600 too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldenTiger

2.4ghz Conroe for me, 4MB L2 cache, $309. Looks like it'll be a beast!!! Sure, 9x multi, but for $700 extra I could get extra videocards, much better RAM, a bunch of great hard disks, etc. I know, I'm violating XS spirit by saying this, but the extra just isn't worth it in that case... I'm thinking a Conroe 2.4ghz stock could hit a good 3.2ghz or so on air which would be sweet :D !

---

What you say is true, but with hobbies its not really about the sensible buy. Buying a ferrari isn't sensible if you've got two kids, but if your income can cover it and you like cars then it would be good to own as a second car. Computing isn't that expensive a hobby when looked at rationally, and because of its nature it can turn a passion into profession rather quickly. These are the people who will spend U$1000+ on a CPU because its a hand selected chip. Others will buy hundreds until they find the diamond in the coal.
But it's not money that seperates people in this hobby, although some would like to think so. It's passion.
On another forum theres a guy that just got the money together for a Asrock Dual SATA board and a A64, he's volt modded the hell out of it and is mating it to his prized BH5 sticks as I type. Now thats passion. For normal people the obvious choice would be to sell the ram and buy a better mobo, hell that thought didn't even cross his wired head. He loves those sticks, it simply wasn't a option.

An E6600 will outperform an FX-62 for 1/3rd the price so at least you can feel ok about 'making do' when you talk to the fanboys ;)