I'd agree with FanIn80 and say stick to Intel right now. AMD hasn't had a good release with the Phenom, and haven't caught up to Intel. Perhaps next year, but for anyone building in the next year, stay Intel.
Now for the fly in the ointment - why Q6600? Very few games use quad core, and the ones that do get very limited benefit. Coding for multi-core is very, very difficult. You will get better performance if you go for something like an E8400. It is dual core but runs faster (3.00 Ghz vs 2.4 Ghz). Very few programs can use the extra cores, but many can use the extra speed. Every guide I've read for the last year has said how, unless you are manipulating a LOT of video (ripping a few hundred DVDs, or producing the next Family Guy) you will get much more bang for your buck by sticking to dual core. In 3-5 years, when programs do start to use multi cores enough to justify them, most people will need to buy a new computer to run then anyhow.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
|