• 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.

What Quad. Q9450 or Q9550?

Vlad Drac

Vlad Drac

Vlad Drac

Associate
Joined
12 Mar 2004
Posts
730
Location
Scotland
Hi all

What will be the better of the new Yorkfield Quads?
I cant make up my mind what one to go for. The Q9450 or Q9550.
I think there will be about £150 between the two when they do finaly come out. That can only be about 6 or 7 weeks now till they hit the selfs so it would be good to get some sort of idea now for when OCuk start doing pre-orders.
 
Q9450 is listed for pre-order at £211 and the Q9550 is £316. Loads of places already have them up and have done for quite a while now.
 
I would personally go for the Q9550 as it has a larger cache compared to the Q9450. Although I think people already with a 65nm Quad would rather not upgrade as theirs not a huge performance gain. People with 65nm Dual Cores would probably upgrade to these kinda like myself + wouldn't need to upgrade mobo as I have the ones that support the 45nm too :)
 
My Q9550 and a few others I have seen have an FSB wall at around 470mhz, but if how the new batch of Wolfdales are performing is anything to go by then Intel's manufacturing process might have improved a fair bit over the last few months. Lower VID for a start.

But yes, as Bradley8988 said. :)
 
PikKOn said:
I would personally go for the Q9550 as it has a larger cache compared to the Q9450. Although I think people already with a 65nm Quad would rather not upgrade as theirs not a huge performance gain. People with 65nm Dual Cores would probably upgrade to these kinda like myself + wouldn't need to upgrade mobo as I have the ones that support the 45nm too :)
Click to expand...

The Q9450 has the same cache size as the Q9550, the only difference is the Q9550 has 8.5x multi and the Q9450 has a 8x multi.
 
Vlad Drac said:
So are the Q9550 not going to be as good at overclocking then?
Click to expand...

weescott said:
My Q9550 and a few others I have seen have an FSB wall at around 470mhz, but if how the new batch of Wolfdales are performing is anything to go by then Intel's manufacturing process might have improved a fair bit over the last few months. Lower VID for a start.
Click to expand...

I just said. ^

The fsb wall of the ES chips doesn't mean it will be on retail chips. Only time will tell, plus its down to luck/batch numbers etc.
 
The Q9450 will be, cause of the price, but there are some issues as to how these will clock, mostly related to how well the mobos will clock them. The cache might be useful though, would like to see benchmarks testing this.

Is there actually any evidence that an FSB wall exists in CPUs, i would think it would be a motherboard thing? And did any of the reviewers try upping the straps on any of them? Really believe that the fsb limit is somehow related to the research done by some of the people last year in regards to FSB straps. Thank god Nehalem will make all this a bit more simple.

It just seems strange that it would suddenly stop being stable @ 470FSB, it sounds like the latencies on the NB needs to be loosened?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom