undefined | Better HN

0 pointsalexey-salmin1y ago0 comments

Oh dear, Q6600 was so bad, I regret ever owning it

0 comments

chucke19921y ago

Q6600 was quite good but E8400 was the best.

Q6600 is the spiritual successor to the ABIT BP6 Dual Celeron option: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABIT_BP6

ABIT was a legend in motherboards. I used their AN-7 Ultra and AN-8 Ultra. No newer board gave the flexibility and capabilities of these series.

My latest ASUS was good enough, but I didn't (and probably won't) build any newer systems, so ABITs will have the crown.

dfex1y ago

The ABit BP6 bought me so much "cred" at LAN Parties back in the day - the only dual socket motherboard in the building, and paired with two Creative Voodoo 2 GPUs in SLI mode, that thing was a beast (for the late nineties).

I seem to recall that only Quake 2 or 3 was capable of actually using that second processor during a game, but that wasn't the point ;)

alexey-salminOP1y ago

E8400 was actually good, yes

mrybczyn1y ago

What? It was outstanding for the time, great price performance, and very tunable for clock / voltage IIRC.

alexey-salminOP1y ago

Well overclocked I don't know, but out-of-the box single-core performance completely sucked. And in 2007 not enough applications had threads to make it up in the number of cores.

It was fun to play with but you'd also expect the higher-end desktop to e.g. handle x264 videos which was not the case (search for q6600 on videolan forum). And depressingly many cheaper CPUs of the time did it easily.

bayindirh1y ago

I owned one, it was a performant little chip. Developed my first multi core stuff with it.

I loved it, to be honest.

JonChesterfield1y ago

65nm tolerated a lot of voltage. Fun thing to overclock.

PcChip1y ago

Really? I never owned one but even I remember the famous SLACR, I thought they were the hot item back then

alexey-salminOP1y ago

It was "hot" but using one as a main desktop in 2007 was depressing due to abysmal single-core performance.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

chucke19921y ago

Q6600 was quite good but E8400 was the best.

astrodust1y ago

Q6600 is the spiritual successor to the ABIT BP6 Dual Celeron option: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABIT_BP6

bayindirh1y ago

ABIT was a legend in motherboards. I used their AN-7 Ultra and AN-8 Ultra. No newer board gave the flexibility and capabilities of these series.

My latest ASUS was good enough, but I didn't (and probably won't) build any newer systems, so ABITs will have the crown.

dfex1y ago

I seem to recall that only Quake 2 or 3 was capable of actually using that second processor during a game, but that wasn't the point ;)

alexey-salminOP1y ago

E8400 was actually good, yes

mrybczyn1y ago

What? It was outstanding for the time, great price performance, and very tunable for clock / voltage IIRC.

alexey-salminOP1y ago

Well overclocked I don't know, but out-of-the box single-core performance completely sucked. And in 2007 not enough applications had threads to make it up in the number of cores.

bayindirh1y ago

I owned one, it was a performant little chip. Developed my first multi core stuff with it.

I loved it, to be honest.

JonChesterfield1y ago

65nm tolerated a lot of voltage. Fun thing to overclock.

PcChip1y ago

Really? I never owned one but even I remember the famous SLACR, I thought they were the hot item back then

alexey-salminOP1y ago

It was "hot" but using one as a main desktop in 2007 was depressing due to abysmal single-core performance.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse