Nice looking setup.
I'd certainly go for the Q9300 out of those 2. It performs a little better, but it also supports SSE 4.1 which the Q6600 does not. Not much uses that instruction set now, but you'd be kicking yourself if a new prog. comes out that uses it and you only have a Q6600.
Some guy
(here) said this:
Compared to the Q6600, it's about 7% faster. Unfortunately, the 7.5x multiplier limits its overclocking potential, and 3.5GHz is about as far as you can go before hitting a FSB wall.
The low multiplier aside, it's not a bad CPU, considering it's the same price as a Q6600. It doesn't blow the Q6600 away, but it is slightly faster and lower power consumption is always welcome.
Here's a direct comparison for you:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...0_4.html#sect0
Another review said this
(here):
the Q9300 is easily an improvement over the Core 2 Quad Q6600 on all fronts.
With GPU, a GTX260 (216 version preferably) would cost you a bit more, but the extra on-card RAM (896 vs 512) would be nice if you want to use a large resolution monitor for your CAD. Just a thought; the 9800 GTX+ really is a great card.
Unsolved 
