Ok, I currently have an intel core 2 quad Q6600. I was wondering whether I should upgrade it this Christmas or see if I can get another year out of it. Basically, I want to know if it will play the new games coming out and are out (skyrim, arkham city etc.). If it doesn't, then I'll upgrade.

Useful details: I have a 768 mb GTX 460, and the processor has been clocked at 3.2 Ghz. I also have 6 GB of DDR2 RAM.

I would be grateful for any advice.

I don't see why you couldn't hold onto it for a while yet. It's still a capable CPU and the fact that we've got at least another year or so of this console generation means that games won't suddenly become more demanding anytime soon.

My brother is still running a Q6600 and GTX 460 (both at stock) and he hasn't had any issues running most games at high settings or maxed out at 1920x1080.

I suppose, it is just that I heard Skyrim is very CPU dependant

I have a Q6600 at the stock clocks, HD 4830, and 4 gigs of RAM. I run Skyrim just fine, with mixed settings, in the high-ultra range at 1920x1080. You shouldn't have any problems at all with Skyrim or any other new game for a while, and you should get a fair amount more performance out of your machine than me.

I think I have my answer, thank you for your help

It probably is, but it's nothing my i5 750 can't handle without any overclocking. Your CPU should be fine too, even at stock clock speeds. It appears to optimized for multiple cores, presumably 4.

Good to hear.

Also keep in mind that on your current motherboard, there isn't much further you can go in terms of processor upgrades (on LGA 775). In terms of buying retail now (like from Newegg), you can go up to a Q9505 or Q9550, or go to a Duo E7500/7600. The latter 2 are dual-cores (rather than the quad-core you have now), however are probably a bit more powerful in terms of each core. The Q95** would be a decent upgrade, however are not worth their price (considering the Intel i series and AMD Phenom IIs). Aside from these (and a few that you might be able to get used), you've really reached the summit of the LGA 775 socket.

Also keep in mind that Skyrim is far more dependent on CPU speed/architecture than on the number of cores. A Phenom II X3/X4 at 3.5GHz will get better performance (6-8FPS or so) than a Phenom II X4/X6 at 3.0GHz. The same goes for any Intel "i" processor in the same family with the same core architecture (e.g. Sandy Bridge) and clock speed.

EDIT: Actually Frodo, while Skyrim may make small use of additional cores, it really is far more depending on architecture/speed. Take a look at this link from Tom's Hardware:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/skyrim-performance-benchmark,3074-9.html

No telling how Intel's old architecture would perform from those measurements, though.

In fact, I'm not sure how to come to the architecture conclusion. Similar architectures at the same clock speed gained performance when going from dual core to quad or tri-core. The differences between Intel and AMD aren't a surprise at all; Intel almost always outperforms AMD at the same clock speed.

I think when I do upgrade, I am going to get a bundle deal instead of just an individual processor, that way in the future there are more upgrade options. On that note, do newegg deliver to the uk? They seem to be a lot cheaper than companies over here.

I mean, the only individual processors that you could get are the ones that I listed in my last post. However, they are overpriced and the performance increase would be negligible. So the only way to do a decent upgrade be to buy at least a new motherboard and processor. Often, bundles will be cheaper than shopping a-la-carte (though you don't have as much choice in combinations).

Unfortunately, none of the PC component websites based in the USA deliver to the UK (that I know of). The majority of non-North-American countries suffer from outrageously high component prices, and unfortunately there's not much you can do about it (unless you know someone who lives in the US that would be willing to order the components and then send them overseas to you).

http://overclockers.co.uk/ is one of the better UK sites that I know of for buying components. The prices are still outrageous, but I've heard good things about their service.

I think overclockers is pretty good, but the best I have purchased from is probably scan.co.uk

They may be expensive, but like you say we get bad prices anyway (could maybe be due to the VAT increase?). Though sometimes a good bundle deal comes along, the bundles are expensive and buying individual components is too expensive for me (I got my current parts second hand off a family member).

I mean, I just said that the architecture had to be similar because I seriously doubt that a Pentium D at 3.0GHz would achieve the same performance as an i5 at 3.0GHz. I'm not sure what you mean when you say that they gained performance going from a dual to quad/tri-core. On the second chart, the Phenom II gained 2FPS from an X2 to an X3, .3FPS going from an X3 to an X4, and it LOST .3FPS going from an X4 to an X6. If you're referring to the difference between the dual-core i3 and quad-core i5, keep in mind that the i5 is just a faster line than the i3. That's the whole point. If you compared a dual and quad-core i5, I'd be willing to guarantee that they have similar performance.

And when you say that Intel almost always outperforms AMD at the same clock-speeds; that is true for these past generations. Back when the Pentium 4/Pentium D and Athlon II were the new thing (and even before that), AMD absolutely blew Intel out of the water. However, Intel has been on top since the E**** series.



Oh, it may well be better. Overclockers is just one that I'm familiar with.

They set the clocks to 3 GHz on all processors, so speed differences between i3 and i5 don't matter. The architecture is basically the same. Now, if they left Turbo Boost on for the i5, then that would explain the performance difference (and also be quite misleading, because it makes setting the clocks to 3 GHz pointless for comparison).