What to buy for future proof gaming? E7200, E8400 OR Q6600?

Status
Not open for further replies.
rockfella said:
^ Dont wanna spend that much. E7200 with only 3 M L2 cache is only 1% slower in games as compared to E8400... so i guess it is the smartest buy..
Click to expand...

Yes, for its price 7200 is one hell of a chip
 
No way E8400....its either E7200 or Q6600 considering the current price levels. Yes this might hurt ppl who have bought E8400 but E7200 is a better buy as the cache of 3MB is more or less nt much important.

If u have the cash get Q6600 otherwise all the way E7200 (witha 9.5 multi) u can easily get to arnd 3.8Ghz for 24X7 use :D
 
Yeah thats what I was reccommending to him, but I got weird comments, now stopped giving free suggestions. Lesson learnt.

Supra said:
No way E8400....its either E7200 or Q6600 considering the current price levels.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for your valuable inputs Supra. E7200 it is, i've used QUAD @ 3.6, didnot find it good enough for 11k at that time not even for 9.5 k ATM :P (Only Games)

Supra said:
No way E8400....its either E7200 or Q6600 considering the current price levels. Yes this might hurt ppl who have bought E8400 but E7200 is a better buy as the cache of 3MB is more or less nt much important.

If u have the cash get Q6600 otherwise all the way E7200 (witha 9.5 multi) u can easily get to arnd 3.8Ghz for 24X7 use :D
Click to expand...
 
Supra said:
Console sucks....if u have ever owned a medium-high end vide card I dunno why u should suggest a PS3 to someone!!!!
Click to expand...

Beacuse its not always the resolution, its the gameplay that matters.

For your kind of games (FPS), you are right.

As per my experience, I like to play NFS (any one) on PS2 with 500% less visual appeal than on a PC because it gives a 1000 times better gaming experience.

The same thing goes with all RPGs.

But no point in arguing on this. In the end its all a personal preference.

And yes, I have a modest configuration and I own a 8600GT and i use HDMI and I know how good things look. But then, its not looks always. :)
 
^^ Dude u can game on PC with X-Box Controller and enjoy console gaming on pc lol.... these days i am only into FPS thatshwy dont feel like buying XBox COntroller. otherwise thats the next thing in my mind.....
 
There is honestly no such thing as better in long term. Dont go by cores alone. 4 cores will be really put to good day to day use after 2-3 years.

Its better to invest in Q6600 only if you really need it now. Keep in mind its SSE3 chip as well. So as time goes by and devs start utilizing SSE4.x, there will be obvious advantage to the E7200/8400.

And E7200 can do a lot more than 3.8G 24x7. It can easily do 4 - 4.2G or even more 24x7 on air. The chip I have seems to run nice and cool even at 4G with just 1.32v
 
And E7200 can do a lot more than 3.8G 24x7. It can easily do 4 - 4.2G or even more 24x7 on air. The chip I have seems to run nice and cool even at 4G with just 1.32v
Click to expand...

WHoa :O ....do let us know the stepping. I dont mind picking one up for 6k if it does 4G 24 X7 :D
 
Supra said:
So I was not blind afterall :rofl:

Hw come u saw at 8:44 Pm :O
Click to expand...

Time shift!!! :lol:

An aperture from alternate dimension created a time rift allowing you to exist in this dimension at multiple time intervals with full awareness. :)
 
rockfella said:
My E2140 does 3.6 but with 1.5vcore. I dont wanna do that for gaming....
As it i have to buy cpu after 20 days, i might pick up E8400 or E7200 after prices settle down lol...
Thanks though...
Click to expand...

i was playing grid with my 2140 at default and my gpu showed 30-40% usage while getting around 20fps at 1680x1050,went up to 3.2G and gpu usage went up to 100% and fps doubled,went down to 3Ghz and gpu usage still stayed at 100% no change in fps.unless you are cpu bound,which i stated earlier you won't be at 1680x1050,its worthless to upgrade your proccy for gaming.though 2140's 1mb cache does hurt a bit sometime but unless you want to play games at low settings you won't notice a difference.
if you really want a gaming upgrade you would be much better off selling that 8800gt and getting ati's 4850 or 4870,that would be a much better upgrade and so called "future proofing"
 
Thanks Vivek,

I really dont wanna upgrade/invest in a new GPU ATM :)

gamervivek said:
i was playing grid with my 2140 at default and my gpu showed 30-40% usage while getting around 20fps at 1680x1050,went up to 3.2G and gpu usage went up to 100% and fps doubled,went down to 3Ghz and gpu usage still stayed at 100% no change in fps.unless you are cpu bound,which i stated earlier you won't be at 1680x1050,its worthless to upgrade your proccy for gaming.though 2140's 1mb cache does hurt a bit sometime but unless you want to play games at low settings you won't notice a difference.

if you really want a gaming upgrade you would be much better off selling that 8800gt and getting ati's 4850 or 4870,that would be a much better upgrade and so called "future proofing"
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom