The Q6600 in most overclock tests will hit 3Ghz easily, with samples hitting 3.3Ghz on air cooling. The Q6600 gives a LOT more L2 cache which will help a lot over the e3300. (8MB vs 1MB), as well a a faster front side bus, so should be a decent step up (on threaded work loads).
I'm very familiar with the potential of the chip, the chip in my desktop machine is a Q9550 overclocked to 3.4Ghz. Was just wondering if this particular Q6600 was a dud or not. My 9550 is about 2x as fast as the E3300 @ 3.4Ghz...which I presume is almost exclusively due to the added two cores.
Also, if you know the stepping/revision of the chip that'd be good info to have. I know that is asking a lot though....unless the cpu is already in a system. I think the revision numbers are printed on the chip but not sure about stepping.
It is actually running on right now. It's a desktop I use in my office for a private fileserver. I don't really need it to be a quad core CPU any longer, but it is. It's also covered with a scythe HSF.
I don't remember how well that one overclocks, but cpu-z says it's family 6, model f, stepping 7, revision B3.
B3's are known not to OC as well as the G0 chips. If I do this I at least want to get a decent OC to make it worth the effort. Let me see if I can find one of those. Thanks for the opportunity I will get back with ya.