F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Yes, the Intel QX6700 works well with an XP gaming rig.

Yes, the Intel QX6700 works well with an XP gaming rig.

Yes, the Intel QX6700 works well with an XP gaming rig.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
T
Tekkerzz25
Member
191
05-04-2016, 01:51 AM
#1
I'm gathering details for a fresh build and it looks like the QX6700 fits the bill around that era. It should work well as a solid CPU for your setup. What additional components should you consider adding?
T
Tekkerzz25
05-04-2016, 01:51 AM #1

I'm gathering details for a fresh build and it looks like the QX6700 fits the bill around that era. It should work well as a solid CPU for your setup. What additional components should you consider adding?

P
Propolix
Member
77
05-04-2016, 03:40 AM
#2
Qx6700 is an older CPU, not a brand-new one. It’s an LGA775 model. Are you assembling a new setup using older components? What are your plans for this machine?
P
Propolix
05-04-2016, 03:40 AM #2

Qx6700 is an older CPU, not a brand-new one. It’s an LGA775 model. Are you assembling a new setup using older components? What are your plans for this machine?

B
BHLxNJx
Posting Freak
881
05-04-2016, 07:31 AM
#3
His name clearly states the answer: Is the Intel QX6700 suitable for an XP gaming rig?
B
BHLxNJx
05-04-2016, 07:31 AM #3

His name clearly states the answer: Is the Intel QX6700 suitable for an XP gaming rig?

G
GamenMetLeviNL
Senior Member
638
05-04-2016, 09:42 AM
#4
Running games from the past with XP or adapting modern titles to work on XP systems is possible. The QX offered impressive speed back then, but today’s games may not match that performance even if they function. It will still work well, though it won’t be as quick.
G
GamenMetLeviNL
05-04-2016, 09:42 AM #4

Running games from the past with XP or adapting modern titles to work on XP systems is possible. The QX offered impressive speed back then, but today’s games may not match that performance even if they function. It will still work well, though it won’t be as quick.

L
Luxius55
Junior Member
11
05-06-2016, 12:11 AM
#5
I already have a better PC setup for playing current games, and I’ll mostly use it for games that fit the era.
L
Luxius55
05-06-2016, 12:11 AM #5

I already have a better PC setup for playing current games, and I’ll mostly use it for games that fit the era.

C
Ceu4_Ezer
Junior Member
31
05-07-2016, 04:10 PM
#6
Ah well, yes. Those QXes were quite advanced for their era. They could even handle more recent technology to some extent. There were models like the 6700 and the 9ntysomething hundred. The 6700 remained impressively fast.
C
Ceu4_Ezer
05-07-2016, 04:10 PM #6

Ah well, yes. Those QXes were quite advanced for their era. They could even handle more recent technology to some extent. There were models like the 6700 and the 9ntysomething hundred. The 6700 remained impressively fast.

H
HeatherHannah
Member
194
05-17-2016, 05:51 AM
#7
Rejecting the idea, this model is a 130w TDP processor with standard performance. AM3+ socket supports Windows XP, and FX chips are affordable. I recommend an AMD FX-6300 for about 40$ on eBay—roughly double the Intel's performance and only 95w TDP. The FX-4300 offers quad-core capability at around 25$ and was released in 2012. For even older options, consider Phenom II X4 or X6, which came out in 2009-2010. The Phenom II X4 955 is about 19$ on eBay and matches the performance of the QX6700 CPU.
H
HeatherHannah
05-17-2016, 05:51 AM #7

Rejecting the idea, this model is a 130w TDP processor with standard performance. AM3+ socket supports Windows XP, and FX chips are affordable. I recommend an AMD FX-6300 for about 40$ on eBay—roughly double the Intel's performance and only 95w TDP. The FX-4300 offers quad-core capability at around 25$ and was released in 2012. For even older options, consider Phenom II X4 or X6, which came out in 2009-2010. The Phenom II X4 955 is about 19$ on eBay and matches the performance of the QX6700 CPU.

I
InfinityAnt
Member
53
05-19-2016, 04:05 AM
#8
Haha, the quickest chip that can handle XP. Apologies for the confusion.
I
InfinityAnt
05-19-2016, 04:05 AM #8

Haha, the quickest chip that can handle XP. Apologies for the confusion.

M
Misterjaws77
Member
215
05-23-2016, 11:12 AM
#9
These are quite recent compared to what I'm targeting. For XP gaming, it would be better to stick with my FX-8350 based PC, which I already have.
M
Misterjaws77
05-23-2016, 11:12 AM #9

These are quite recent compared to what I'm targeting. For XP gaming, it would be better to stick with my FX-8350 based PC, which I already have.

D
dan176
Junior Member
8
05-23-2016, 01:15 PM
#10
Xp was so awful. Try win 2000sp4. The phenom II are ok but with the wrong graphics card you will be stuck at 60fps. Core 2 duo/quad is a bit more future proofed. Ive seen it do pushing 300fps on minecraft.You should look for one with a 12mb cache. You can play doom 95, battlefield 1942, Duke nukem 3d, e.t.c on windows 10. Windows 10 is basically windows vista sp5million at this point. Tech is stagnant. We're still waiting for amd to create 128bit so we can throw all this stuff away and start over just like y2k. Core 2 duo makes a decent win 10 machine.
D
dan176
05-23-2016, 01:15 PM #10

Xp was so awful. Try win 2000sp4. The phenom II are ok but with the wrong graphics card you will be stuck at 60fps. Core 2 duo/quad is a bit more future proofed. Ive seen it do pushing 300fps on minecraft.You should look for one with a 12mb cache. You can play doom 95, battlefield 1942, Duke nukem 3d, e.t.c on windows 10. Windows 10 is basically windows vista sp5million at this point. Tech is stagnant. We're still waiting for amd to create 128bit so we can throw all this stuff away and start over just like y2k. Core 2 duo makes a decent win 10 machine.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next