Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

    Figured a lot of you would like to see this pretty good review of some affordable quads, including the q9400, the q6600, and AMD, and others.

    Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

    They don't really pick the games I would have gone with for the review, but at least they used Crysis. I also wish they had thrown the q9550 in for good measure. But still a good read for people looking to buy a new CPU soon.

    By the way, the q9550 is down to $313 on newegg.

    LINKS

    * *


    Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

    -Carlos A. Urbizo-


  • #2
    Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

    Originally posted by Bamboo View Post


    By the way, the q9550 is down to $313 on newegg.

    www.microcenter.com has the q9550 for $299. See: http://microcenter.com/search/search...rtby=pricehigh


    My choice is the q9450, which is basically the same as the q9550, just at a lower speed (2.66Ghz vs 2.83Ghz) and with the high 12MB Level 2 Cache. As I overclock, I can reach the 2.83Ghz easily, even at stock settings, and use the extra $50 for a game like Call of Duty World at War coming out next month or other hardware goodies. For those who don't overclock, the q9450 is still fast - and if $50 is not an issue the q9550 is great deal at $299!

    The E8400 is also a steal at $149.99.

    I have a DFI mobo too, the test set up used a DFI LANPARTY DK P45-T2RS, but for those who may want to grow into Crossfire, I would recommend a X38 or X48 based Motherboard as they offer true PCI Express 2.0 x16 + x16, while the P45 chipset is only x8 + x8. SLI chipsets are also an option, just be sure the mobo offers the PCI Express 2.0 x16 + x16. Note: the X48 chipset is known to be more stable at overclocking than the X38 mobos. If not overclocking, the X38 are very good too.

    The new Intel Core i7 is coming out soon, so if you can wait, the next month or so may show further savings in current CPU's and motherboards as well. Then again, that always seems the case...

    :icon_frow
    |RIP| Counter=Ops 12.09.09 : Marine - Squadmate - Friend
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

      I agree Zippy, but the q9450 is discontinued, and replaced with the q9400, which has half the L2 cache of the 9450. Games love L2, which is one of the reasons if I remember right that AMD was beating Intel for a while in gaming back before the core2 came out.

      It is very hard if not impossible to buy the q9450 now.
      Newegg still lists it, but they havn't had it in stock for a while
      Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Yorkfield 2.66GHz 12MB L2 Cache
      And it's even more expensive than the 9550.

      LINKS

      * *


      Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

      -Carlos A. Urbizo-

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

        AMD was beating Intel because the Netburst architecture was a disaster from the start. Intel's Core/Penryn architecture addressed the many problems of their previous architecture, actually took the IPC lead back from AMD and also clocked higher than anything AMD could produce. Even the Extreme Edition P4s, which were loaded with cache, were no match for an AMD64 running at much lower clock speeds.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

          A timely post. I'm shopping for a quad-core based system. I'm hinting at it for xmas and will buy myself what I don't get as presents.

          But my criteria isn't how well a game runs by itself, but rather how well a game, a compiler, a web browser loading several pages, and my mail client all work together. (Recent compilers can use one CPU per file being compiled, so I'd have to deliberately throttle it down to less than all cores to let the game have a core of two.)
          Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

          snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

          Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

            I was shopping around a little bit after I read the comparison when Bamboo originally posted it. Unfortunately there still haven't been much in the way of improvement for Phenoms.

            I looked again last week because I run Vista 32 in a VM for my work machine on it's own 7200 RPM 2.5" drive, and my host system is Vista x64 with 4GB (and RAID0). I have an X2 2.8 mildly clocked up to 3.0GHz and of course the 48070 1GB. Despite all of that, I still get some lag in the VM due to all of the programs I need (or want) to run on both systems and I figure a Quad-Core would be the best thing to clean this all up.

            The Black Edition is only a paltry 2.66GHz, and it's still the top offering with not a lot of OC potential. In some cases, my 5600+ can outperform it especially in games. For all of the reasons we're familiar with.

            Based on price and principle (and what I already have...) I've always had AMD and intend to continue to support the platform, but, those Core2 Quad systems sure tempt me....
            "But way back where I come from, we never mean to bother. We don't like to make our passions other peoples' concern." -Dar Williams
            Former Captain of the 55th Infantry Division

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

              It looks like the Intel CPUs use socket LGA775, and the E8600 (a dual core) also uses this socket. So will the same mobo support both dual and quad in this package? I'm thinking I should get the E8600 now and wait a year for the quads to get a better price/performance number.

              The review was done with a DFI LANPARTY DK P45-T2RS. Is that a decent mobo for that socket? Or what would be preferable? (My current game box has an AMD Venice 939 in a DFI LANPARTY mobo.)

              And I'm thinking of going ATI with my next video card, from the sound of reviews here. (Current is EVGA 8600GTS.)
              Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

              snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

              Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

                Some DFI boards are good, but they are usually more expensive than a similar ASUS board. They are targeted towards tweakers and overclockers.

                Just make sure that what ever board you pick supports the FSB of the CPU, but pretty much any p45 chipset motherboard will support all then recent duals and quads.

                LINKS

                * *


                Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

                -Carlos A. Urbizo-

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

                  As said by Bamboo, DFI boards are for tweakers. They have an amazing amount of memory settings, some other nice features, like CMOS reloaded, which allows you to save multiple BIOS configurations, so if you clear the CMOS, all you have to do is select the saved BIOS and start from where you left off.

                  You may also consider an Asus P5Q-Pro, I've built a couple systems with that board, and it worked out quite nicely. They're fairly cheap too.
                  It's Gaming
                  Proud to have been a member of the 55th Infantry Division!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

                    I've also helped a bunch of TG and PR guys build with a P5Q-Pro, and they have been good for a good price, especially when newegg has them on sale.

                    Actually just looked, and newegg has some KILLER combo deals right now with that motherboard, including memory or PSU or even Vista.

                    I can't believe you can get the MB and 4gig Corsair dominator 1066 with cooling fan for about $160

                    LINKS

                    * *


                    Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

                    -Carlos A. Urbizo-

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

                      Given that the quads are kind of gutless, what would you recommend in a dual? With Nihalem coming out, I'm thinking I don't want something really expensive, if I'm going to upgrade a year from now. And I'll probably want to drop a quad in the socket later, once better ones start to show up at reasonable prices. (I'm also thinking that this will be on my xmas list.)
                      Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                      snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                      Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Comparative Tests of Inexpensive Quad-Core Processors

                        I still love my quad. Playing Ghost Recon the past couple of days, I like looking over at the core usage of my CPU on my 2nd monitor in the Vista gadget and seeing the 4 cores running at like 40% with everything at max.

                        LINKS

                        * *


                        Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

                        -Carlos A. Urbizo-

                        Comment

                        Connect

                        Collapse

                        TeamSpeak 3 Server

                        Collapse

                        Advertisement

                        Collapse

                        Twitter Feed

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X