Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
The Youngest of Yorkfields: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Processor Review

Started by: gomogo | Date 02/09/08 12:47:43 AM
Comments: 63 | Last Comment:  07/10/08 12:09:56 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-5]

1. 
Not bad, it beats the Q6600 in performance and power consumption, yet costs the same. A higher multi and 12MB L2 would have been nice though. :P

I'm personally waiting for a Q9450... only $50 more but you get double the cache and the 8x multi should allow for more overclocking headroom too.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/09/08 08:57:53 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
7.5 multiplier with less cache then it predecessor? Performance looks good but this is disappointing given how long the 6600 has been out :-(
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/09/08 09:20:29 AM]
Reply
 
If the Q9300 is meant to be a budget quad core along the lines of the Phenom, then its not too unusual I think. Its going to be priced in the same bracket as the E8400, so that'll make it about $50 less than the Q6600 (of course obligatory price gouging for new stuff online is going to kill that at first).
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/09/08 10:07:39 AM]
Reply
 
I agree that my bet for the replacement for the q6600 is going to be the Q9650. Back Ordered for $324. Looks to be the best bang for the buck, and that is what we are truly talking about. Isn't it?
Can't wait to see how the Q9300 compares to the Q9450.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/10/08 02:31:58 PM]
Reply

2. 
yo clueless - of coarse i new this before the artice as i have posted for months:
"Today we are going to talk about the youngest quad-core Yorkfield CPU, which should replace the today’s market hit – Core 2 Quad Q6600."

wrong! its 1333 balance my friends again - i have said this months - you can google it!


any novice can clock a q6600 to 3.6ghz

a 1333 part is not replacing a 1066 part -to quote your own words:

"It is not enough to increase processor Vcore to ensure that it will run stably at high FSB speeds. To ensure stability you need to increase other voltages, too: CPU PLL Voltage, FSB Termination Voltage and NB Voltage. For example, when we overclocked our Core 2 Quad Q9300 to 3.5GHz we used the following settings:"

why start article out by saying its going to replace it? you guys must not have read my posts on THG?

I really like you site - but your previous articles even show after fsb 400 or 1600 fsb that pefornce decreases and you have issues!

bad intro, stock settings mean nothing today - again overclocking is mainstrean dell and hp do it.

the sweat spot on all C2D chips is multiplier of 9 the exact number of q6600. i would not be so sarcstic if where not for 2 facts: 1) i have posted this over and over on THG and 2) you say this is going to replace it but your own test show its no 3.6-3.8ghz chip.

i have been shipping 3.6+ghz air cooled systems for months.

Bottom line, intel is raising prices, you need to move up the ladder to get your 4-4.25ghz quad system.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/09/08 11:28:01 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Yeah Dell OCs. Only on their OPd XPS systems.

Stock settings do matter. Not everyone who buys a computer is a giggling/drooling technophile who tries to eke out every last iota of performance from their system. Most people I know don't even defrag, for Christ's sake.

Don't get me wrong, I OC all of my systems. B-)
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/10/08 08:45:55 PM]
Reply
 
So what is the point of you post? We should all be happy about a 7% increase and bow down and kiss Intels ass right? After Intel puts the memory controller on the core and adds CSI what else do you think they will give us? Dont even bring up cell, and ARM is about three years away on just laptop computers.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/11/08 06:16:42 PM]
Reply

3. 
I am gonna have to ask it again ->
Why isn't there any x264 encoding benchmark ?
For the love of God, vastly more people use x264 encoder than the Mainconcept H264 encoder. So, why this love with Mainconcept ?
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/10/08 01:11:12 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
MainConcept is a bigger name in the industry and more professionals will likely use it.

While x264 can achieve better results than MainConcept, it's at the expense of a lot of time. MainConcept still edges out x264 in the quality/performance ratio.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/12/08 07:09:42 AM]
Reply

4. 
Interesting ...
But the main question for me is:
"Will this creature (Q9300) work with my ASUS P5N32-E SLI which is 680i chipset or to take Q6600"
because I don't whant to change MB until nehalem or fusion.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/10/08 02:06:58 AM]
Reply

5. 
Looks like I made a good call with my E8400 for gaming. Thanks for the info!
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/11/08 10:28:31 AM]
Reply

[1-5]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment