W7 improvement from Intel E5200 OC vs Q6600 vs Q9450?

[mystvearn]

I curently have my E5200 OC at 3ghz with stock cooling. Not going higher yet until I get my Coolermaster Hyper 212 Plus. The reason I OC'ed my PC is that I see some performance decrease. I have also bought another 4 gb ram. I'll try 8 gb's first to see if this solves the problem.

My question is-will there be any real live performance gains moving from E5200 OC (say 3.4ghz) to Q6600 or Q9450 stock?

 

[Mashed1316]

Well...

E5200 is a Dual Core.. Q9450 is a Quad Core, they're both different CPUs

Intel® Pentium® Processor E5200 (2M Cache, 2.50 GHz, 800 MHz FSB)with SPEC Code(s)SLAY7, SLB9T
Intel® Core (Q9450)
Intel® Core (Q6600)

The difference are somewhat noticeable, so.. yes.. there is a real life performance difference between those processors

 

[pparks1]

Your biggest bang for the buck would be the Q9450. The reason being the 12MB of L2 cache, versus the 8MB of L2 cache in the Q6600. Your E5200 only has 2MB of L2 cache. I used a Q9550 when I built my box and it's been a great CPU. I haven't felt inclined to upgrade yet at all.

 

[mystvearn]

Well...

E5200 is a Dual Core.. Q9450 is a Quad Core, they're both different CPUs

Intel® Pentium® Processor E5200 (2M Cache, 2.50 GHz, 800 MHz FSB)with SPEC Code(s)SLAY7, SLB9T
Intel® Core (Q9450)
Intel® Core (Q6600)

The difference are somewhat noticeable, so.. yes.. there is a real life performance difference between those processors

I know its a different CPU- but do cores matter for running normal programs and the OS itself?

 

[Mashed1316]

more cores = more multitasking = more jobs that your cpu can handle...
more speed = more heat = bigger heatsink