Well, it'd be a large overclock (you probably know, but that's a 25% overclock), but if you have good cooling I'm sure you could do it. However, if you had the same cooling on the 6850, you could possibly be able to overclock it further. Stock the Q6600 is 2.4GHZ, and the E6850 is 3GHZ. You'd have to wait until the E6850 comes out before you can see how well those overclock. I'd assume a lot better, considering it's 1.333GHZ FSB vs. 1.066GHZ FSB. Intel will probably phase out the 1.066GHZ processors first, so it'd probably be a bad idea to get one. The middle-upper range computers will use 1.333GHZ, and the low-end computers will use .8GHZ FSB (like the E4000s). Nothing uses quad-core also, infact, not a whole lot of things even use dual-core. I think Intel jumped the gun a little bit getting the quad-core. Or else they're assuming people will think that you multiply the speed by 4 or something like that. Really, the best way to go is get the E6850 I think.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
Well, it'd be a large overclock (you probably know, but that's a 25% overclock), but if you have good cooling I'm sure you could do it. However, if you had the same cooling on the 6850, you could possibly be able to overclock it further. Stock the Q6600 is 2.4GHZ, and the E6850 is 3GHZ. You'd have to wait until the E6850 comes out before you can see how well those overclock. I'd assume a lot better, considering it's 1.333GHZ FSB vs. 1.066GHZ FSB. Intel will probably phase out the 1.066GHZ processors first, so it'd probably be a bad idea to get one. The middle-upper range computers will use 1.333GHZ, and the low-end computers will use .8GHZ FSB (like the E4000s). Nothing uses quad-core also, infact, not a whole lot of things even use dual-core. I think Intel jumped the gun a little bit getting the quad-core. Or else they're assuming people will think that you multiply the speed by 4 or something like that. Really, the best way to go is get the E6850 I think.