Intel Computer

How significant is the difference between these processors?

I'm about to make a purchase to replace my laptop which is failing after about 2 years. I'm curious as too how much the difference is between these processor speeds? What is the best bang for my buck? I plan to build the system with 3gigs of ram, and with a GeForce 8800 gt 512mb. Would I be able to run, say, Bioshock at maximum with the first processor? Would I see a significant gain if I jumped up to the second or third? How dramatic? Thanks! -Intel® Core™2 Q6600 Quad-Core (8MB L2 cache,2.4GHz,1066FSB) -Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor E6850 (4MB L2 Cache,3.0GHz,1333FSB) +50$ to my order - this is what I'm looking at in particular.. how much better would this be than the last? -Intel® Core™2 Q6700 Quad-Core (8MB L2 cache,2.66Hz,1066FSB) +300$ -Intel® Core™2 Extreme QX6850 (8MB L2 Cache,3.0GHz, 1333FSB) +1100$ (this is not an option for me, just here for comparison)

Public Comments

1. Actually, any processor from there is extremely fast. Big difference in day to day use, you won't feel, trust me. In multiple applications (like pohoto edit, video edit) there you will feel a difference. But believe me, a normal user/gamer will not feel it. even an over-average user.
2. All of the processors you picked out would are very decent processors, I'd say that with any of them and that 8800 gt you should be able to play it atleast on high- max settings. Remember that most of your high settings for games depends primarily on your Graphics card. As for the best bang for your buck In my opinion the q6600 is going to be it, It has future proof ability because it is a quad core and it is a very powerfull processor by itself. Also if you get a decent overclocking board you should be able to get that processor up to the 3ghz range without much of a problem. I wouldn't suggest the 6850 except that it is cheap but it will be more than powerful. The 1333 fsb makes a slight diffrence but is hardly noticeable. The real reason i recommend the quad is because they are so cheap. Only around 279 The last two are good processors but as for bang for the bug they are not so cost effective I am an avid overclocker. And the whole point of overclocking is to get the best price fore performance if you take a look at your first and third option the only diffrence between them is the Ghz rating. With overclocking you can take the cheaper version of the two and overclock it to/or past the ghz rating. Therefore you are paying less and getting more performance. People will tell you that overclocking will destroy your computer or decrease the life of your processor, only the later is slightly true but only by a negligable amount. If done carefully and you have effective cooling, (aftermarket coolers run about 45-50 dollars for a decent one) You should get great results and satisfaction.