so from single core case of 3.0 , i am now on q6600, and i think slower clock speed with four times the core wasnt worth for MY case of extensive math-stuff i was doing (rendering, resampling, recording in divx/mpeg4/wmv via software solutions, breaking/creating/modifying-math-based security) and call me upon feelings, but i THINK , single core of 3.0 was “feeling” faster in terms of time-taking to finish job from 0% to 100..
i even bought and deployed xp x64 and provided all tricks i could find for multicore operations.. feeling never changed of q6600 outperforming the 3.0 old processor..
so… no i cant go back to 3.0 cuz of giving away the hardware, simplest and cheapest solution with least down time is sounding to be E8600 processor…
anybody with experience in these, please share ur thoughts+experiences.. i know world isnt exactly READY to show full potential of quad cores.. so for MAXIMUM speed what are my options for least time taking? (kinda turned off by quad cores, unless i did something wrong)…
my reduced-instruction-based xbox 360 even outperforms the q6600 (scared if gizzy is going to smack me for saying that)
That sounds very odd. Which '3.0' processor did you own before getting this one? Any previous-gen single core hardware is easily outdone by todays Conroes and Phenoms. Care to elaborate?
Are you sure its not something messing up your OS that's killing performance?
i am sure it was intel p4 series 3.0 (hyperthreading only) running with acpi enabled.. windows saw it as two processors..
hardware with this q6600 was actual swiping of motherboard, memory and processor, and fresh installation with multi core tweaked applied..
its not the killing performance scenario, i just dont think that quad-core piece made this much difference.. im sure benchmarking will proove me wrong.. its just ‘feeling’
Honestly, any quad core Conroe CPU shouldn’t just be ‘benchmark only’ difference, its easly a couple of hundred percent faster than the Prescott (P4) 3.0ghz models. Its not something you’d barely notice, it should be a huge difference.
So I’m going to have to say that its either a fault with some other hardware in your machine (such as the hard drive or the RAM) or there’s a software fault (virus or anything else that’s eating up CPU cycles in Windows).
i am sure it was intel p4 series 3.0 (hyperthreading only) running with acpi enabled.. windows saw it as two processors..