Hello everybody,

I'm building a new system. It is meant to be a rock solid stable powerful platform, not for games, but for an impressing applicative experience (mainly compilers, math apps, office apps, etc.). OC that requires more than the original Intel stock fan won't be done.
I have a nice budget, but I do have restraints, which I've already stressed enough. I've already decided what would be most of the system's components:

Motherboard: Probably GA-P35-DS3P, or maybe Intel DP35DP, the one I will find more stable.

Memory: G-SKILL 4GB (2*2GB) 800MHZ CL5 (the only 2*2 reasonably priced I've found, couldn't find a CL4 pair).

Hard drive: RAID 2*WD740ADFD Raptor 10,000RPM and another SATA drive, most probably Seagte, for data storage only, maybe even my current Maxtor IDE 250GB relatively new drive, in order to cut the budget.

Display: Leadtek 8600GT extreme 256MB

My biggest problem is that I can't choose a CPU. The E68580 is the best dual-core around with 3GHZ, but the new Q6600 G-0 stepping sounds very promising too. However the former has a clock rate of 3GHZ 1333 FSB in contrast to the latter which has a clock rate of 2.4GHZ with a 1066 FSB.

Which one should I choose ???...

And a few more questions:
Would I be able to even do a minor OC with the memory I chosen ? Would a HEC 400WATT PS be able to maintain this configuration (with only a DVD recorder in addition to the mentioned spec) ?
Does the Raptors make such a noise as I've been told ?
Any other recommendations regarding my setup ?

Thank you all very much.

Mistake - memory would probably be OCZ 4GB (2*2) 800MHZ CL5 Vista Upgarde.

"mainly compilers, math apps, office apps, etc "

I bought the E6850 because I do a lot of programming and compilers require raw horsepower. Hence I am recommending the same for you. Espically considering you don't have a desire to OC.

Also look into the Crosair HX450 or 620. Very good PSU's.

i was a little happy that we dont have Q6600 vs E6850 threads ,mate will u please ( i said please) read the forum or even google for it ,

just look @ google search for Q6600 vs E6850 :
http://www.google.com/search?clien [...] 8&oe=utf-8


Here are your answers :

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/d [...] q6600.html

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/s [...] i=3038&p=8

Chadsxe is correct. No Oc and heavy compilers and math apps...6850.

I've already read an infinite no. of posts, threads and articles.
None of them included a straightforward answer, especially regarding my conditions.

And what about my additional questions ?

Well, I definitely disagree on the E6850.
I think the Q6600 is a no brainer for multiple reasons.

1) IF you compiler supports 4 cores, it will wipe the floor with the E6850.

2) If you compiler does not support 4 cores and you are actually working on a number of projects and applications at the same time, you can configure your different apps that do not support 4 cores to run on seperate cores. Example - Set Compiler on Core3+4, Set Math Apps on Core1+2, let Office productivity can just pick a core or you can divide further.

The benchmarks are nice, but they really do not tell the whole story for a "Workstation". Frequently you will kick off a heavy cpu process that could be running for long periods of time. Assuming you have other heavy tasks you would like to do at the same time, you could be SOL for performance on a dual core.

Maziar, be kind. If the Codedi wants to participate in his own Q6600 vs. E6850 why squash that?

Anyways, Codedi. I recently upgraded one of my rigs to specs not too foreign from yours. I went with the E6850 and purchased an addtional 4GB of Corsair CL5 ( http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6820145176 ) to add to an existing pair of CL4 Dominator C4Ds.

Even stock the E6850 is a nice, yet cool running chip. With an ever-so-slight overclock...say to 3.4Ghz it flat out slams the the virtualizing tasks I feed to it (2 virtual PC domain controllers and 4-5 clients running concurrently, all quite responsive) and the "E" never any asks questions or complains.

However, given that you may be considering Vista 64 over XP Pro 64 (for the 4GB of RAM you're considering) I'm almost inclined to recommend the Q6600 to you though as I understand Vista can better feed the quad cores.

If the apps you're looking to run are multi-threaded and/or your planning to run several multi-threaded apps concurrently you may want to give the "Q" more priority. ...but its hard not to love the E6850 for its raw power and generous overclockability. The term "Nasty Fast" applies. However, I've read of folks taking their quads up to 3.6, abeit with nicer cooling than you'd need for the "E". Though your budget may seem stressed now you may find resources available sooner than you think for a better cooling for the "Q" lending it to better overclocks.

Anyways, sorry to ramble, yet these were the things I had to consider and I think they may apply to you as well. Though the E6850 is has a lot of left over power even after I try to overstuff it I'm still kind of curious as to how a "Q" would have been. When you look back a year from now what will you wish you'd done?

...and yeah, as Maziar said, you can surf the net and read similar considerations.

Good luck!

And, Yes, a 400w PSU would be fine.
I don't know anything about that PSU off the top of my head, but the 8600GT uses minimal power.

I faced the same question but ended up going with a used q6600 G0. It runs at a daily overclcok of 3.6Ghz on water and is a fantastic chip. Still, I'd love to have the raw speed the 6850 is capable of. I'm sure with good cooling it would go to 4.0GHz Orthos Stable easily.


Look at your software and if it is optimised to run on multiple cores the quad may be a better bet. If not then go for the raw power of the e6850.

I am still not agreeing with you guys on the Q6600.

Halcyon ** though it is a fair assumption he never stated he was using a 64 - bit OS. Many people throw 4 gigs of ram in their 32-bit systems. Sure some is wasted but it assures that you are feeding the absolute max to your programs and not having some pulled away for OS needs.

My argument has to do with the fact that is he more worried about completely dominating a compile and math ap or is he more worried about being able to run a **** load of programs at once at decent speeds. Sure there will be a time when IDE's and compilers actually utilize quad cores but that is still a while off. Enough to the point where I personally would have gone through another build before it even affects me.


codedi - you might want to provide some more details on future plans

He stated that OC to those speeds is not something he wants to do.

Halcyon , havent u seen we have tons of thread like this ? dont u become tired answering same quetsion every day ?

Firstly, as I stated before, OC won't be done in a way that requires more that stock fan, probably not at all, stability is very important.

Secondly, my current OS is gonna be WinXP Pro 32BIT, even though There is the 3.2GB limit issue, which I heard there is a solution for. As soon as Vista SP1 is released and after apps comatability or replacements are verified I'm gonna jump to Vista Ultimate 64BIT.

I'm actually upgarding my almost 7yr old setup (1400Mhz T-Bird on Gigabyte GA7DXR with 1GB DDR266) that was upgarded moderately along the years (mainly peripherals and memory and HD) and still rocks, and this is something I don't do frequently (even though I hope the next time would not be that far), meaning, I'm trying to do the best but I can do, considering the money, while long term performance is crucial.
I already have a Compucase 6A19 case with a compatible 400WATT HEC PSU, supposedly a relatively reliable piece.

Another issue is that in ISRAEL, my country, I can't put my hands on every component Newegg has to offer, even though I must say we get almost everything here.

The bottom line is that I want a system that can take everything I throw at (my Windows performances experience is very important to me too), and preferably should do that as long as possible.

Maziar, yeaaaah, but there's a chance there will be other input or opinions from which I'll learn too. Since the subject is interesting (to me), I like to participate. Now, I would get tired of answering "What color is the sky?" or "Who makes the Intel E6850?"

After having read this I stand by suggestion. Some might site "long term" as a check in the Q column but I ask you this. Is it more important for you to run a few programs at the fastest possible speed you can or is it more important for you to run a whole bunch of programs at once? From you applications I am guessing you want to run at the "fastest possible speed". The clock diffrence of 600mhz is going to be huge when considering that.

Maziar,

I'm a guest here, so I don't wanna be rude, but this forum's goal is to assist people and discuss relevant issues (such as our current debate), and not just to redirect them to other places.

If someone don't want to assist or contribute his opinion, he doesn't have to, but I'd prefer him not asking others to act this way as well.

well i posted something , but its not been posted lol ,
i just wanted to say please read the forum before asking questions, yes our job is here to help, but u can help us a bit by reading other articles ,anyways i answered u and i appologize if i talked bad , sorry

cheers

I really can't say.

I understand that the FSB edge is negligible, but I'm unable to value the 600MHZ gap in contrast to the multi-tasking ability.

This is the problem.