Il_napoletano Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Hi guys I got the possibility to change my E8400 to a Q9300 which is better? Quad core lower clock speed 2.5ghz or Dual core 3ghz higher clock speed? I will be overclocking as my current E8400 is @4.1ghz Thanks Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Unless its for free I wouldn't bother. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il_napoletano Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Unless its for free I wouldn't bother. yes it is...i've got it in my cupboard so would you or wouldn't you? Edited February 1, 2012 by Il_napoletano Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scr4wl Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 If you've got it already go for it. I think Waco meant he wouldn't bother spending money to upgrade to another core 2 chip. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercuryDoun Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 yes it is...i've got it in my cupboard so would you or wouldn't you? If it's free try it! You should be able to get adecent clock out of that 9300, in the end 3.6GHz+ 9300 > 4.1GHz E8400. Whats worst that happens? its an awful overclocker, only hits 3.2GHz you think or feel it performs worse than your OC'd 8400 and you swap the 8400 back in? Sure wasted time and effort, but other than that, what have you got to lose? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d6bmg Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Q9300. OC it to around 3.5GHz and it would perform better than E8400 IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il_napoletano Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Q9300. OC it to around 3.5GHz and it would perform better than E8400 IMO. that's what I thought...Thanks everyone!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disparaitre Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) ... Edited September 21, 2014 by Disparaitre 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wevsspot Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Ward, thank you for pointing out that the correct answer to his question should be driven by the processor's intended uses. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tjj226_Angel Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Hey, would that E8400 need a good home after this? I am trying to put together a surprise build for a friend, and if that little chip needs a good home to go to, there would be no better one then right here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coors Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 in the end 3.6GHz+ 9300 > 4.1GHz E8400. Not always. I remember back when dual cores first came out. A higher clocking single core would outperform a lower clocking dual core. Since pretty much nothing was able to use both cores. Same thing today. Hardly any games right now use more then two cores. So if gaming is his main concern then the higher clocked dual core could out perform it. The quad has the advantange of the extra cores to run background processes though so it could go either way depending on how well the quad overclocks. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Do not assume that just because a game or application is new that it supports quad-core processors because to give you an idea, Metro 2033 does not, Skyrim does not and pretty much any console ported video game does not with a few exceptions. Also, old versions of archiving, video editing and adobe products may not unless the company wrote a patch for it to include multi-core support ( for this you have to use the web and determine for yourself ). He's talking about a FREE upgrade to a quad core. There's absolutely no reason to stick with a dual core CPU (especially one of similar vintage) when he could be using a quad at slightly lower clocks. Sure, not all games support them (though Skyrim MOST CERTAINLY does), but that doesn't mean he'll see a decrease in performance by using a quad over a dual core. More cores leaves the OS more room to do things in the background while the game is eating up 2 cores. It's not hard to imagine that even with a game that runs on two cores only that it'd run better with more cores available in the background. Anyway - it's a free upgrade - swap them out, overclock it, and enjoy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now