• 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.

Q9450 Vs. Q6600

sdfuk

sdfuk

sdfuk

Associate
Joined
8 Jun 2004
Posts
960
Location
Essex
Hi

Is the extra 4mb cache worth the extra £100? Does the faster FSB on the Q6600 make up for this cache diffeential?

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 LGA775 'Yorkfield' 2.66GHz 12MB-cache (1333FSB) Processor - OEM at £293.74

VS.

Intel Core 2 Quad Pro Q6600 2.40GHz Guaranteed to run at 3.30GHZ (1466FSB) - Retail at £193.86

Cheers
S
 
You really want to compare it against the Q6600 OEM for £140.99

At the inflated prices that some are charging for the Q9450 its not worth it at the moment.
 
I beleive it's roughly 10% performance increase clock for clock but that's a figure i remmeber from somewhere and I don't have any links available so don't trust that information 100%. Is it worth it? No... Especially when considering a Q6600 is £141 inc vat from OCUK, the Q9450 is over 100% more expensive for a minimal increase in performance.

- Pea0n
 
Can buy for the same money a decent mobo + the Q6600 and clock it to 4Ghz (with water).

Result, future proof (can always stick a Q9450 in the mobo if you fancy) and FASTER by far as the Q9450 will hit a titanium wall at 3.6Ghz probably!

For the above reasons I am ordering the Q6600 I think.
 
would like to see some reviews to using q6600 @3.6 on air going water soon hopefully @4ghz so i guess it would not be worth buying q9450 ? with multi at 8 ? can they even reach 4ghz?
 
The Yorkies have struggled to hit 4GHz i have heard because of the lower multi's and FSB walls. However, i have only heard this on a few occasions, might be different with the Retail ones.
 
Around 3.6ghz but they are faster clock for clock, so keep that at in mind.

The Q9450 when at the correct price will be a no brainer.
 
So did the Intel building ZX37 burn to the ground or something?

I've got an E2180 that I'll use until my reasonably priced Q9450 pre-order turns up.
 
psychas said:
does more cache helps in games ? i dont think games need more then 4mb cache at the moment ?
Click to expand...

Cache does play a factor ...


But it all depends on the game.

with 8mb or 12 mb the differences are negible.


Of course more cache helps in encoding...but with the SS4 instructions set

of the new Q9450 the gap widens a huge amount in certain modern day apps.
 
I know that cache helps any program that it's behaviour is predicable to some degree. The more predictable the better.

Encoding is a task were the cpu will know what to do when you begin assuming you dont start another couple of programs while its working.

I dont have any proof, but theoretically games with the freedom to "go anywere" as opposed to a racer or something will show difference.
 
sdfuk said:
Hi

Is the extra 4mb cache worth the extra £100? Does the faster FSB on the Q6600 make up for this cache diffeential?

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 LGA775 'Yorkfield' 2.66GHz 12MB-cache (1333FSB) Processor - OEM at £293.74

VS.

Intel Core 2 Quad Pro Q6600 2.40GHz Guaranteed to run at 3.30GHZ (1466FSB) - Retail at £193.86

Cheers
S
Click to expand...

The Q9450 Retail's cheaper at £258.49 inc vat, and both the retail and oem are out of stock. No idea why OcUK have the oem at a higher price though.

To be honest the price of the chip is way inflated due to supply issues, if there was a good supply of them, they would be a little over £200 inc vat. Still they will fall dramatically once intel's shipping them in bigger numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom