13 replies to this topic

[Nemo]

Check it out - http://www.overclock...ws/intel_q9450/

[Ste]

I would enjoy seeing a head to head performence comparison to a Q6600 G0.

That way most could easily determine if the performence increases over a Q6600 justify the price.
A table such as this one would be of great use, but note the table is of a Q9300 VS A Q6600 and it was only one review.



The rule of thumb I use for any direct comparison for two products is if the product being compared shows an average performence increase greater than or equal to it's price percent over the other product, than it is the better buy.

Course there is so much that is harder to test for and is not often encorporated into reviews such as energy consumpiton, overclockability and cache benchmarks.

Edited by Ste, 14 April 2008 - 07:39 AM.

[kingdingeling]

I don't see what you're asking Ste.... The CPU is being tested against the Q6600 in this review, have another look. It's not head to head, but the information you're asking for is all there

[Bosco]

He might be asking for overclocked scores from the Q6600.

FYI that is a Go Q6600 that was tested.

[jammin]

Does anyone else think one of the more interesting things to come out of this review was the performance of the Phenom for some of the games at high resolutions?

[Kash]

That was actually one of the things that really surprised me. I haven't seen AMD beat Intel in much of anything lately, so it was kind of like something straight out of left field.

[Bosco]

Ya for some reason that game takes to AMD kinda of like 3dmark sometimes

[jammin]

It wasn't just one game was it (though the company of heroes results are interesting)

The Phenom managed to put out higher numbers @ 1900x1200 for 4 / 7 games tested.
Sure, the margins weren't huge but it still surprsied me.

Edited by jammin, 15 April 2008 - 06:17 AM.

[titom91]

what are the tweaks done for 450 x 8??

("450 x 8came easily with 1.30 volts on the core and a tweak to the northbridge and FSB voltages to add some stability.)

[dr_bowtie]

Just curious why compare the 9450 to a Q6600 when a better speed comparison would be the Q6700 as they are both 2.66ghz in speed...?

MaximumPC did a review on Q9300 vs. the Q6600 and the Q9300 won on almost all accounts...

I would have rather went with a Q9450 myself as my 1st Intel Quad build but I chose the Q6700 simply for price..

[ccokeman]

Old school versus new school. Plus no Q6700 on hand! Did have the 9770 though. The Q6600 is still a tremendous value at 200 bones but the OC results from some of the latest chips have been less than stellar. Dont get me wrong some still do clock well just not like they did from the initial release of the GO stepping chips.

[dr_bowtie]

Old school versus new school. Plus no Q6700 on hand! Did have the 9770 though. The Q6600 is still a tremendous value at 200 bones but the OC results from some of the latest chips have been less than stellar. Dont get me wrong some still do clock well just not like they did from the initial release of the GO stepping chips.

sweet....was just curious man....

So far I am really liking my Q6700 running 300x10 at 1.19v right now and breezing along....

once I get the case review done and I mod the case (will post case log) so I can actually keep the board installed I am going to lean pretty hard on this chip....