UPDATE: E6320 is now out of stock, E6400 still available
Frys [outpost.com] has Intel Core 2 Duo E6320 1.86 GHz OEM CPU for $120. Shipping starts at $5, and depends on your zip code. Lowest on PriceGrabber [pricegrabber.com] for a retail version is $156, and for OEM [pricegrabber.com] is $187. Thanksleones
They also have Core 2 Duo E6400 2.13 GHz Retail CPU [outpost.com] for $150 + $5 Shipping. Thanks DiggiD [Discuss]

while this is a good deal, try nto to use the word "mistake" unless the retailer farked up....

149.99 is only a slight break off of newegg

Here is a nice ASUS motherboard for $106 shipped to go along with this CPU.

http://forums.slickdeals.net/show...1&t=602835

-Bean

Quote from pokesteve : while this is a good deal, try nto to use the word "mistake" unless the retailer farked up.... 149.99 is only a slight break off of newegg

$50 difference is a bit more than slight, although probably not price mistake

Ok I bit:Ground Shipping $7.12
Battlefield 2 benchmarks for this chip OC'd: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchips...i=2802&p=9
yay!

what's better, the E6400 or the E6550?

Man this is tempting. I've had my heart set on the Q6600, but with this I could buy a decent motherboard and this chip for the same price as the QUAD alone. Regardless this is a great deal at $50 less than anywhere else. Great find OP. Repped.

Thanks for the post, Fry's changes their specials so often its hard to sort through the ads!

Thanks OP!

Quote from ShadowGuard : $50 difference is a bit more than slight, although probably not price mistake

haha i think he meant not to use the word mistake so as to not trigger his deal alert thing

Quote from coltrane69 : Man this is tempting. I've had my heart set on the Q6600, but with this I could buy a decent motherboard and this chip for the same price as the QUAD alone. Regardless this is a great deal at $50 less than anywhere else. Great find OP. Repped.

I can't stop myself....Why do you want this generation of Quad cores?
First, you can't "future proof" your system.
Reasons why not to buy the quad cores now....They are energy hogs & have few options to reduce power consumption. They have an obvious FSB bottleneck with communication between the cores. BUT both Intel & AMD Quad cores that are coming will be better on energy not only initially, but they have instructions to better utilize cores and shut down un-needed cores etcetera resulting in further power savings. Performance, while they can't do away with the bottle neck altogether they are improving the communication between cores...resulting in better performance. Shrinking of the die. Just as shrinking the die from 90nm to 65 resulted in HUGE performance improvements, shrinking the die for (Intel) to 45nm will decrease power consumption, and heat. That means better OVERCLOCKING.....on & on this list goes. By shrinking the dies size they can fit MORE chips per wafer, that means cost improves again. I mean, unless you do video editing transcoding, massive photoshopping....for a living, where the small savings in time per job will actually mean something....then skip the quad cores today for something much better tomorrow. Besides, on half the power, C2Duos can be overclocked to make up the difference. And when it comes to gaming....forget about it. It will be YEARS before quad cores come out ahead. Game companies are barely writing games for dual-cores. Do you really think they are going to alienate the majority of Gamers by writing massive-multi-threaded games today...NO WAY!

Quote from pistopito : what's better, the E6400 or the E6550?

Can your motherboard support the 1333FSB?
E6550 has a 4Mb Cache (multiplier 7 X 333 FSB = 2333 MHz) ---- 1333Mhz FSB
E6400 has a 2Mb cache (multiplier 8 X 266 FSB = 2133 MHz) ---- 1066Mhz FSB
If you don't overclock than if the E6550 is close in price than it is a better buy based on the faster stock speed and more 2Mb's extra cache. HOWEVER in a multitude of reviews the cache has only a VERY SMALL impact on performance, which can be overcome by overclocking the processor slightly beyond the large cache processors. If you plan on over clocking then you may want to consider something else entirely. (of the two, the E6400 would probably OC better for example both at 400FSB.
E6550 (7x400=2800mhz)
E6400 (8x400=3200mhz)
End total results come down to a number of factors including your motherboard/memory and on how much more the G0 stepping that the E6#50's have really improves the overclockability. Hard core sites say 3-5% improvement only!

If you are looking for an overclocking prize on a budget....you might consider a E4300/E4400/ *(E4500-when the price finally starts to drop) or the E2160 or E2180. They have higher multipliers and with their lower caches etcetera they are very cool and energy efficient. They overclock in the case of the E2160 & E2180 in the neighborhood of 80 - 100% on air cooling alone. Some fantastic results on the stock air cooler too.

Quote from Bdubslawman : I can't stop myself....Why do you want this generation of Quad cores? First, you can't "future proof" your system. Reasons why not to buy the quad cores now....They are energy hogs & have few options to reduce power consumption. They have an obvious FSB bottleneck with communication between the cores. BUT both Intel & AMD Quad cores that are coming will be better on energy not only initially, but they have instructions to better utilize cores and shut down un-needed cores etcetera resulting in further power savings. Performance, while they can't do away with the bottle neck altogether they are improving the communication between cores...resulting in better performance. Shrinking of the die. Just as shrinking the die from 90nm to 65 resulted in HUGE performance improvements, shrinking the die for (Intel) to 45nm will decrease power consumption, and heat. That means better OVERCLOCKING.....on & on this list goes. By shrinking the dies size they can fit MORE chips per wafer, that means cost improves again. I mean, unless you do video editing transcoding, massive photoshopping....for a living, were the small savings in time per job will actually mean something....then skip the quad cores today for something much better tomorrow. Besides, on half the power, C2Duos can be overclocked to make up the difference. And when it comes to gaming....forget about it. It will be YEARS before quad cores come out ahead. Game companies are barely writing games for dual-cores. Do you really think they are going to alienate the majority of Gamers by writing massive-multi-threaded games today...NO WAY!

I appreciate your candor. Actually I am planning on doing a lot of HD video editing in the future... via footage from my Canon HV20 camcorder. And as of right now using applicable video editing software i.e.(Sony Vegas) , an overclocked Q6600 cannot be beat in price to performance ratio (even by a highly overclocked Core2Duo).

I know as well as anyone else that if you wait, something newer and cheaper will come out. But If I lived by these rules...I'd still be using a Pentium 2 266 processor....because the new Pentium X would be coming out in x months.

Sometimes you just reach a point, where newer performance and price are reasonable enough to make the purchasing leap. I'm currently at that point. My current computer utilizes a P4 3.0, state of the art 3 years ago...but now pretty slow in relative terms.

According to my research the OC'd Quad will give me a huge performance gain and significant time savings for video editing and conversion versus my p4 3.0.

As great of a deal as this C2Duo deal is, I still think that over the next 2 years a Quad core will more than make up for itself in video editing time savings...enough to warrant the extra $120 spent.