Originally Posted by Kokin
Q6600 is still pretty decent for most games, especially at 3.8GHz. I would agree that the 7850/7870 would be the highest tier I would go for that CPU though.
That's what I plan on doing. I thought about the 7850, or 660Ti; however the 7870 appears the best value. I'm hesitant to order for newegg at the moment. They haven't been too kind with a pending RMA, but I will wait until that's resolved... before I voice my complaints further.
Originally Posted by timaishu
Curious how you came to this conclusion.
I had my e6600 at 3.3ghz and the 6350 absolutely destroys it. Would two cores makes that much of a difference?
It's not about the number of cores. It's about the architecture of the chip. I don't want to get off topic, but.. in my personal opinion AMD hasn't put out anything worthwhile since Phenom II. Your AMD 6350 scales similar to C2D architecture. Clock for clock they're about equal. You should begin to pull ahead "theoretically" once you overclock beyond 4.0 ghz. The advantage of your chip is limited to programs that take advantage of your extra cores. That aside you have a pre-overclocked multi-core C2D in performance. The only reason it "destroys" your E6600 is the advantage of the extra cores and that your 6350 is I believe factory clocked at 3.9. So, that's the reasoning behind your "increased" performance.
Our chips clocked equally will trade blows.
Someone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or close.Edited by Pr0pheT - 6/30/13 at 12:02pm