Intel guys....opinions on Q6700 vs Q9300

Status
Not open for further replies.
well sence new apps will be written soon to use all 4 cores you will see a big difference. you will be more future proof with a quad core
 
well sence new apps will be written soon to use all 4 cores you will see a big difference. you will be more future proof with a quad core

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I just wanted to throw the idea out there for discussion to be sure.

I edited my post and added several things to it while you were posting.
 
Simple explanation is the smaller the process I.E. 45nm vs. 65nm the worse it will overclock.

I disagree. The E6850 (65nm) and E8400 (45nm) have identical clock speeds (3.0ghz), multipliers (9x), and fsb speeds (1333mhz). Of the two evenly matched processors the 45nm E8400 is by far the better overclocker. The only reason the 65nm quad cores are better overclockers is they have higher multipliers than the 45nm quad cores currently available.
 
how far have you clocked your 9450?

I havent tried clocking my Q9450 just yet, but im considering going for 1600FSB to put me on par with a Q9770.

And i agree with you puddle jumper, people have taken a 9650 past 4.1Ghz, which people would struggle to do with a QX6850 which is the same spec with 65nm process. The only disadv for 45nm is less posible vcore voltage, but 1.4v Max is stil safe. My Q9450 takes in more voltage than my PD (1.28 vs 1.20), and is still happy.
 
if those 45nm can take the voltage the 65nm can it would be insane. 1.4V for me seems like nothing. I used to pump way more than that daily. Then again it is only an $80 chip so I really don't care.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom