• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Phenom II 940 or Q9550?

shinester184

shinester184

shinester184

Associate
Joined
20 Jan 2009
Posts
708
Location
Worcestershire
Even though a large price difference, benchmarks show Phenom II is better than a Q9550?

Can't decide which one to get? What do you guys think?

I will mainly use for video editing in Adobe After Effects CS4. A bit of gaming as well.
 
If overclocking then the Q9550 has a much better chance of getting a higher overclock on air....if running at stock or just a mild overclock 3.2-3.4ish then either one is fine really.
 
Am running a Q9550 myself @ 3.4.

First time I've bought Intel & have to say it was/is one of the best upgrades (from Opteron185) I've ever made. Was and remain very pleased with it.

BUT having read the reviews of the 940 if I were buying today I'd probably give the 940 the nod over the Q9550.

Speeds look similar - although if you are really into clocking then the 9550 would get the nod.

Price wise - the 940 + motherboard package looks much cheaper than the 9550

Futureproofing - not a lot in it - but I would think the 940. Partic with the i7 now out , the 9550 is 'old' ( not a term I would really consider appropriate for a quad core !) tech.

It's really good to see AMD producing a really competitive cpu again :D
 
i would say get the 940.

my 940 can do 3.5ghz with stock volts and 3.7ghz with a small bump up on voltage (+75.0mv = 1.42v) but btw not every cpu oc's the same speed.
 
AgedIdiot said:
Am running a Q9550 myself @ 3.4.

First time I've bought Intel & have to say it was/is one of the best upgrades (from Opteron185) I've ever made. Was and remain very pleased with it.

BUT having read the reviews of the 940 if I were buying today I'd probably give the 940 the nod over the Q9550.

Speeds look similar - although if you are really into clocking then the 9550 would get the nod.

Price wise - the 940 + motherboard package looks much cheaper than the 9550

Futureproofing - not a lot in it - but I would think the 940. Partic with the i7 now out , the 9550 is 'old' ( not a term I would really consider appropriate for a quad core !) tech.

It's really good to see AMD producing a really competitive cpu again :D
Click to expand...

Replace Opteron 185 with 180 and I've done exactly the same.

The main thing that put me off the 940 was a lack of reasonably priced motherboards that supported it out of the box a couple of weeks back.

This may be different now.

Very happy with my 9550, it's the first CPU I've ever been able to overclock (3.4Ghz at the min) and actually reduce the vcore from stock :)

You can't lose with either IMO. The 940 is as old tech as a 9550 in reality because as far as I can tell it won't run in the new AM3 boards although I could be wrong.

shinester184 said:
Even though a large price difference, .
Click to expand...

Not huge though, I got an OEM 9550 for £217 when the 940s were £195

Coupled with an £80 MSI P45 board the 9550 worked out cheaper. Granted the 940 was retail but I had no intention of using the stock HSF.
 
Last edited:
Sweetloaf said:
You can't lose with either IMO. The 940 is as old tech as a 9550 in reality because as far as I can tell it won't run in the new AM3 boards although I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
no it won't run in the AM3 boards for 2 reasons, 1. it as 940pins where am3 socket as 938pins, 2. it only as ddr2 controller..

tbh am3 is only for ddr3, if your not bothered about ddr3 then just use the am3 chips in a am2+ board.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom