A quartet beats a duet... every time!

I purchased my G0 Q6600 from ClubIT back in late October, 2007 when the G0's (the new stepping, at that time, versus the older B3 version) were scarce, so I went with a vendor who guaranteed that I would get one (versus the distinct possibility of getting the older "B3" version of the processor with most big-name vendors).

For the uninitiated, the usefulness of a quad-core CPU versus the more ubiquitous (and less expensive) dual-core version is dubious for most desktop users. Most applications are not multi-threaded and therefore are not able to make use of the extra CPU cores packed onto the Q6600. Your operating system (Windows, Apple OSX, Linux, etc) can, to some extent, "balance" (sometimes) different tasks between cores, in which case a multi-core CPU can yield noticeable advantages.

However, many software developers are adding "multi-thread" capability to future versions of their applications to take advantage of the new processors. Therefore, at this moment, a quad-core CPU is the best bet for "future-proofing" your computer (if there is such a thing), and Intel is the leader of the pack -- by a wide margin (substantiated by every review on the planet).

Why the Q6600?

For starters, the price/performance ratio of the Q6600 is nothing short of remarkable. This processor has single-handedly given the average desktop user high-end, workstation-caliber performance for a price that is simply unimaginable. The Q6600's dual-core sibling, the E6600, is only a few dollars less expensive. The Q6600 is essentially TWO Intel E6600 processors, for only a few dollars more. It's a no-brainer, especially since the Q6600 will run on most of the same motherboards that support the E6600.

Second, the Q6600 (especially the newer G0 model) can be easily overclocked to a speed that rivals or exceeds Intel's latest flagship $1000+ quad-core "Extreme" processors (as-of this writing). With just 60 seconds in the motherboard BIOS, my Q6600 is running at 3.2GHz, air-cooled (ie: heatsink and fan), at all stock voltages and RAM FSB (800MHz). Only the CPU is actually overclocked (using a GA-P35-DSR3 motherboard) again, at stock Vcore (1.3v). It is rock-solid stable (Prime95 "Torture Test" for 24 hours) and the four cores never exceed 50C (SpeedFan, corrected) under load and run at 20-30C idle. I have run it at a fully-stable 3.6GHz, but prefer the cooler temps that 3.2GHz operates at. I am reasonably certain that I could get to 4GHz if I wanted to move to water cooling, though I haven't experienced any lust for more power with the current setup (a first in my computing life). The thought of "overclocking" your computer to run faster than it was intended may be a frightening prospect for many, but I assure you, the task is easy to learn and simple to accomplish. It is very analogous to removing the speed limiter/governor on your car. You know it's capable of going much faster, but it has been artificially "limited" to perform slower than that ability — in this case for the sole purpose of further enriching Intel's coffers by forcing users to pay more for the same processors with higher "governors."

I run 8GB (4x2GB) of Patriot Extreme Performance DDR2-800 RAM (at stock Bus and VLU) and an EVGA 8800GTX-OC GPU and this is the fastest desktop computer I have ever used (Windows Vista Ultimate x64).

I am NOT a gamer. I've never played a game on this computer. I do use Photoshop CS3, Lightroom, InDesign CS3, Illustrator CS3, Dreamweaver, Premiere Pro CS3, AfterEffects CS3, and a number of other CPU-intensive (and multi-threaded) applications. I can process PARs, rip RARs, convert x264 HD video, download NNTP, and write this review all at the same time, all without ANY noticeable slow-down or system "sluggishness." This processor has single-handedly ushered in a new era of personal computing productivity I never would have believed possible.

Behold, the power of four cores!