• 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.

Any reviews for the Q9450? How good is the overclocking?

Q9450 retail chip results

Q94502.jpg


full thread(long and crap read ;) )http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/showthread.php?t=1904644
 
I was reading that forum last night, lots of bad english waffling and not a lot of real info. It appears that there might be a problem overclocking the chip on the X38 chipset however, one of the guys couldn't get his Q9450 past 3.2Ghz stable. The new nvidia board n790i, looked to be performing great getting the chip to 3.8Ghz.
 
but clock for clock the new q9's are like 8-10% quicker than a Q6600 right? plus cooler?

I think its nearer 0-12%, varies between types of task.

For games it is supposedly very near 2-3% at least game saw in a list of benchmarks a few weeks back.

If it was an alround 8-10% everyone would want one.
 
but clock for clock the new q9's are like 8-10% quicker than a Q6600 right? plus cooler?

well thats the score i get with the 8800GT + Q6600 @ 3.6ghz (3dmark06)..

havent really seen other benchmarks but the difference is not worth 100 pounds!!!! unless you dont even look at prices anymore?
 
Is 3dmark 2006 a good measure of quad core processors? Is it not more about graphics card as when it was developed I don't imagine it was done with multi-core processors in mind.
 
Is 3dmark 2006 a good measure of quad core processors? Is it not more about graphics card as when it was developed I don't imagine it was done with multi-core processors in mind.

i too have been wondering about this.... can a 2 year old graphics benchmarking program really be a good test for a multi core cpu's performance...? :confused:
 
Back
Top Bottom