Which processor has the smallest bottleneck?

I'm strongly considering buying the new Alienware m17x and want to get the Dual 260M's but am not sure which processor to get. My question is this: What is the slowest processor that I can get that will not create a large bottleneck between the Dual nVidia 260M's and the processor? Here's the list:
-Intel® Core™2 Duo P8600 2.4GHz (3MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
-Intel® Core™2 Duo P8700 2.53GHz (3MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
-Intel® Core™2 Duo T9600 2.8GHz (6MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
-Intel® Core™2 Duo T9800 2.93GHz (6MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
-Intel® Core™2 Quad Q9000 2.0GHz (6MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
-Intel® Core™2 Quad Q9100 2.26GHz (12MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
-Intel® Core™2 Extreme Quad QX9300 2.53GHz (12MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)

Thanks for any Advice

 

Well, obviously the most powerful processor would create the least "bottleneck" in the system (and in this case the processor would be the very powerful QX9300). But, you should realize that the CPU rarely ever is the bottleneck for a gaming system. Games running at high settings places most of the load on the graphics cards, so they are usually the bottleneck.

I would say that a T9600 is arguably enough to not create a bottleneck in pretty much all games, although other posters with more experience with high-end gaming systems can probably offer a more detailed insight.

 

What I'm asking, in other words, is this: What is the slowest processor that I can get that will not create a large bottleneck between the Dual nVidia 260M's and the processor? Sorry, bad wording

 

get the qx9300

 

The answer to your question really cannot be measured, but I will venture to say that both the T9600 and Q9000 are good options. The Q9000 will offer improved multi-threading capabilities for games, multimedia work, and CAD as developers focus more on coding software as multiple threads.

The Q9100, with an extra 260MHz of clock speed and double the L2 cache will not offer much of a real-world performance boost over the Q9000.

Nor are the P series Core 2 Duos worthwhile, as you probably don't care for the power savings that the Penryn CPUs have to offer (25W TDP vs 35W for the Txxxx).

 

It would depend on cost, I am quite happy with the Q9000 in my W90 but I also can overclock it to 2.7+ghz. I dont think I would be happy with the Q9000 at 2ghz, however it didnt bottleneck me in any games really with dual 4870's and thats faster than the 260's

I would not get a new high end machine with a dual core, quad core is the way to go. The QX9300 is just too expensive for what you get, but AW is known for being a high priced machine to start with and if you cant overclock for sure you may need/want the extra power. Shame though the real advantage of the X series is the unlocked multi and you cant even use it.