upgraded from E6600 to Q9550. Massive improvement

[hit-man 0]

I think i better take your advice. I guess the risk of investing now in an "old" Q6600 is really too high, even they are quite cheap. I'll better take my E6600 on a new P45-board, new RAM and a HD4870 or so and have a major improvement.

thanks guys

[Nemesis_wales 0]

im running the Q9550 in this new rig, along with 8GB of RAM (i can only play with 3 Gb even in 1.15) and the ATI 4870X2, and althought the game perforance is alot better (when i get it 2 work) i have to admit the graphics look just the same as they did on my old 7800GT. so i think the quad cores are def the way to go, not just for gaming but for everything ive notcied improvments, im just fed up of vista 64, , this is first time i left AMD and Nvidia and i have to say im happy with intel CPU but ATI is not impressed me at all, if this cant run arma 2 without all sorts of tweaks and fixes all rip it out and go for a nvidia card but keep the CPU but maybe overcloack it

[cross 1]

im running the Q9550 in this new rig, along with 8GB of RAM (i can only play with 3 Gb even in 1.15) and the ATI 4870X2, and althought the game perforance is alot better (when i get it 2 work) i have to admit the graphics look just the same as they did on my old 7800GT. so i think the quad cores are def the way to go, not just for gaming but for everything ive notcied improvments, im just fed up of vista 64, , this is first time i left AMD and Nvidia and i have to say im happy with intel CPU but ATI is not impressed me at all, if this cant run arma 2 without all sorts of tweaks and fixes all rip it out and go for a nvidia card but keep the CPU but maybe overcloack it

Nemesis,

If you are having issues in Arma with a high-end system, post in the 1.15 Feedback thread in this section giving your system specs and the performance problem.

Ondrej from BIS (aka Suma) was interested in how 1.15 patch performs with high end machines & high memory as they will be the base for Arma2.

[sle 0]

Anyone thinking of upgrading from an E6600 would do well to note that they can easily go past 3Ghz on the stock cooler. Mine's been at 3Ghz for a year now, and it's got to be cheaper than buying a quad for a marginal performance increase.

[Tankbuster 1747]

Anyone thinking of upgrading from an E6600 would do well to note that they can easily go past 3Ghz on the stock cooler. Mine's been at 3Ghz for a year now, and it's got to be cheaper than buying a quad for a marginal performance increase.

Didn't you read the thread? The performance increases have been surprisingly high. That's why I started this thread in the first place.

Also, I doubt that a E6600 can go past 3Ghz on the stock cooler easily. An experienced overclocker might be able to but for most of us, it's unattainable.

[sparks50 0]

Nowadays you would probably be better off with a E6850 or something for a budget anyway.

It has more cache too, if I remember correct. But no doubt E6600 was very under clocked from the factory.