What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Q6600 still viable?


Mar 23, 2011
Huddersfield, England
Picked this up now. Am able to run WoW on high settings getting a constant FPS of 60 but that can drop to around 30 if in a busy area like Stormwind. Still I see a big improvment on what I've ever used. Got Starcraft 2 also and am able to run on Ultra settings with exeption for AA and the multisampling thing.

So from these experiences from frame rates what will I be getting from a 570? On WoW would it help push the 100 barrier and around 50-60 in crowded areas?


Well-known member
Mar 15, 2011
Unless you're using a 120Hz monitor you are not going to see a big difference in having triple digit FPS. Assuming that you're using a regular 60Hz monitor, anything above 60FPS is wasted except for extra headroom for FPS dip in crowded spaces. Anything that is 30FPS or more is still very playable.


Well-known member
Jun 23, 2010
The universe
In theory, all of the money we spend on mods and upgrades could be put to "better" use. It just depends on what your priorities/values are. Your idea of better use isn't necessarily shared by the OP.

I think the point that rjbarker was making is that maybe the OP has the money to "play" and wouldn't blink at spending a few hundred on older tech just to see how well he can make it work. It's quite possible that he has the cash to upgrade straight to a 1366 but would just rather play around with more 775s. I didn't get the impression, from the OP, that that was the case, but you never know.

I'm in that boat. It was fun getting my Q6600 system to where it is, but I've been contemplating a Q9550 or Q9650 just for the fun of trying to get it up to/past 4.0. I don't *need* it, but it'd be fun to play around with, and would be a quicker procedure than swapping out my mobo, processor and RAM (and possibly re-installing my OS). It's just fun to play around.

To me, it's just like riding a slow motorcycle at 90% of its capacity rather than a fast one at 25% of its capacity; there's a lot of fun to be had in riding the wheels off of that slow bike (including all the modding that you can do to make it faster). Might not be the best analogy, but you get the idea.
Exactly. That's why I've replaced my Q8300 with the X9650.
Besides, I don't want to upgrade to an 1366(I've got the cash) because I prefer to wait for LGA 2011 or maybe Bulldozer will bring a nice surprise... :thumb:


Well-known member
Jul 13, 2009
I'm still using a Q6600 (on Maximus Formula) as my main rig although I had to remove one of my videocards to make room for my Revo2.

The performance of the core system is not a problem, but the lack of highspeed connectivity is. There are no SATA3 or USB3 ports and only a couple of empty 1x PCIe slots. Unfortunately PCIe 1x USB3 cards bottleneck at about 100MB/s writes and 127MB/s reads which may be okay for HDDs but are way too slow for SSDs. The old ICH9R bottlenecks total throughput at about 650MB/s which I found out with my first Vertex RAID-0 array two years ago.

I'd be quite happy continuing with the Q6600 if it weren't for the mobo connectivity issue. If I have to get a new Sandybridge MB (I'm waiting for the MSI Big Bang Marshal) of course I'll have to get a new CPU and RAM whether I need them or not.

It's the price I'll have to pay for those eight full-length (4 at 16x or all 8 at 8x) PCIe slots, half dozen SATA3 connectors and dozen full speed USB3 ports. I'm sure the overall performance increase will be a pleasant improvement though.


Well-known member
May 24, 2010
q6600 is a superb chip...any quad chip with 3ghz speed will run any games and applications without any issues.intel and amd is still releasing dual core chips .lol
IMHO you can use it for so many years.


Active member
Feb 12, 2011
Saint John, NB
I'm not using a monitor at the moment but I'm using a 32" Samsung TV what has that 100 motion thing.
Sadly, the Motion 100 thing on Samsung LCDs isn't true 120Hz. Your computer still sees it as a 60Hz display. The 120 is only useful for frame interpolation (which tends to make movies look weird), and native 24Hz Bluray playback. In sum, you've got a 60Hz display and won't see any benefit to framerates greater than 60.

Latest posts