e8400 or q9450

[P2Mc28]

Edit - I just bought the e8400

Waiting sucks! I thought I had everything figured out, but sitting around waiting for my processor to become available and I of course end up reading more and more about stuff and I start to doubt my decision...

Alright. I had originally decided on the e8400 when I was picking out components and doing my researching and asking my questions, but one thing that has been glaring out at me is the idea that 2-3+ years from now, quad+ cores could be king. I have every intention of this system I'm building being around 3+ years. For example, I'm running a P4 2.8c right now. My next system is going to last a while, so I want it to have that ability. It was originally a P4 2.4b but I took the chance to upgrade my system when the family computer died (just tossed in my "old" parts).

Anyway, I've now come to the conclusion that the q9450 will have a lot more staying power than the e8400. But now I need to know are the components I've picked originally for the e8400 going to need some tweaking? I'm thinking the only change I really *might* need to make is the memory (should I be posting this question in the memory forum?) My goal with the e8400 was to hit 3.6~4GHz, which was going to use DDR2 800. Since the multiplier is lower on the quad, will faster memory be a better idea? What is a typical "goal" or "easy" overclock for the q9450?

 

[taltamir]

staying power in a computer is useless. You want staying power? rather then waiting 3 years to upgrade buy a computer for 50% of your intended budget TODAY. in a year and a half use the other 50% to replace/upgrade it. You will probably end up with 2x the computer you would have otherwise, and avoid the atrocious sluggishness of the third year. Computers should be upgraded every 9 to 18 months, depending on that year's hardware development rate (it varies year to year), price, etc. Ideally each COMPONENT should be upgraded separately every 9-18 months based on individual component development rate.
And sell the old ones on ebay for further mullah.

 

[Tempered81]

e8400/3110 for the money

qx9650 if you can afford it

wait for nahelem if you still can't decide.

a q6600 for 189 that oc's to 3.5~3.6 is a great deal too compared to these low multi 45nm quads.

if you're buying a 9450 or 9550 over a q6600 because you want a quad and you overclock, i'd either save cash and grab the q6600, or go all out with a 45nm qx9650 yorkfield.

 

[Mango1970]

I had the same issue myself when the new G0 steppings came out. I could NOT decide between a Q6600 G0 or the new e6850. I was torn... I bought both . I ended up building the e6850 first on an eVGA 680i and loved it... still love it. It oc'ed so well and ran cool. I eventually bought a P35 board and then built the quad. I have to tell you that ever since I built the quad... the e6850 has been used less and less. I have to admit the Q6600 runs hotter (of course), does not OC as well as the dual.. (I mean it requires too much Vcore to get it way up there) but with all the encoding I do, the dozens of apps I have running at the same time, it's just become my baby.

I am not in the same boat as you.. in other words the ONLY reason I would upgrade myself is if I wanted to try and use less power... get a bit lower temps for about the same performance. Not really worth it for me.

As for your RAM question... well depends. Yes if you do the quad... and insist on trying to get that sucker as high as possible and lets say you don't want to tinker much with your RAM ratios etc... you will indeed need faster RAM. Consider also that many regular DDR2 800 RAM can run even at DDR2 1000 speed if you lower the timings and increase the V. My Crucial Ballistix PC26400 DDR2 800 is rated at 4-4-4-12 400 Mhz at 2.1 V. I can actually run it at 460 Mhz now on my quad... 5-4-4-14 at 2.05v on the current OC of my Q6600 at 3.32 GHz. I had a choice of running my RAM at 1:1 which would actually run LOWER than it's regular 400 Mhz or I could play with the strap which i did and hence my speeds.

On my eVGA 680i I can run my RAM at whatever the heck speed I want unsynching it from my FSB speed. Some say there are still sweet spots with the 1:1 ratio yada yada but honestly I never noted much difference.

Lastly... cost. I got the RAM i did simply because a while back it was expensive period to get even DDR2 800. Now I have seen in so many place 4 GB sets of PC1066 RAM for so cheap it makes me sick. If it's just a matter of a few bucks... get that Gskill ram or whatever does those speeds guarantted... and don't worry about having to lower your divider etc. Or get a board that lets you run totally async. I still believe however, that at the end of the day, it's going STILL be your max FSB that will be the limiting factor... based on the CPU itself or the mobo you will be using. For the e8400 which has a multi of 9 and running stock at 333.. it should be total CAKE on pretty much any board and with pretty much any RAM to hit 9X400 and get 3.6. If that same CPU can hit 450 FSB... still even with RAM like mine that I know can do 450 at 5-4-4-14 you will hit that magical 4Ghz and beyond.

The quad with its 8 x even at 400 from its 333 stock will be 3.2 GHz (not bad for any qaud personally) and again if it can do 450 FSB as many reviews have shown, and your mobo can do it and you have again decent DDR2 800 RAM that can do 450 you will see 3.6Ghz and again I believe this is totally doable. If you insist on the quad and it's stuck at the 8X as you noted, you would need ram that would do FOR SURE 500 Mhz. Again my RAM can do that with even more relaxed timings and more V. So it's all possible in theory... in practice for a 500 FSB the board needs to be really good.. tried and tested and there are many boards reviewed that I am sure can handle that. As long as your RAM can do the 500 or close with relaxed timings and more V you are golden. Paying a fortune for RAM that can get you the same 500mhz but maybe with better timings is I think a total waste of time. The differnce in perforamnce is sooo minute... i would spend the coin on a better/faster/larger HD or maybe 50$ more on the video card I might be getting to get one that is better cooled etc etc... so many other options.

 

[P2Mc28]

In regards to staying power - Like I said, I'm currently running a P4 2.4c. This thing is nearly 5 years old. Now, a large part of my still having this is that I was a high school student with no real means of income. So, sure, I suppose I just might be able to upgrade every 1.5-2 years now.

Hmm. Everyone's input and reflection on my own situation has definitely made the "downgrade" to the e8400 seem a lot more logical. Especially since, right now, I truly do not have any use for 4 cores. That was just me looking down the road.

And I simply prefer the 45nm process over the q6600 for lower voltage, lower temps, which typically results in a longer longevity.

I believe I've finally come down off the q9450, and a 4GHz e8400 is my goal after all. Especially because I think I can go pick one up RIGHT NOW... xD


Thanks for everyone's input! I love these boards =)

 

[Skraeling]

Im getting a 9450 becuase well i can afford to wait so figured why not.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Mango1970
.<snip>....
The quad with its 8 x even at 400 from its 333 stock will be 3.2 GHz (not bad for any qaud personally) and again if it can do 450 FSB as many reviews have shown, and your mobo can do it and you have again decent DDR2 800 RAM that can do 450 you will see 3.6Ghz and again I believe this is totally doable. If you insist on the quad and it's stuck at the 8X as you noted, you would need ram that would do FOR SURE 500 Mhz. Again my RAM can do that with even more relaxed timings and more V. So it's all possible in theory... in practice for a 500 FSB the board needs to be really good.. tried and tested and there are many boards reviewed that I am sure can handle that. As long as your RAM can do the 500 or close with relaxed timings and more V you are golden. Paying a fortune for RAM that can get you the same 500mhz but maybe with better timings is I think a total waste of time. The differnce in perforamnce is sooo minute... i would spend the coin on a better/faster/larger HD or maybe 50$ more on the video card I might be getting to get one that is better cooled etc etc... so many other options.

Well, my motherboard and ram were tested @509 mhz stable, but my X3350(Q9450) won;t even post over 470, and won't boot over 450, and is not stable until 447. A DS4 is almost a $200 motherboard, and my tests using a dual-core were great.

The quads are a whole new animal IMO.