Intel Cpu choice.

[JPB]

I have a thread going here in General Hardware about my system build.

However, I am now having trouble deciding which CPU to go with. I originally chose the E8400 but after I got to thinking about it...I want to keep this system for at least two years.

My problem is this. What if I go with dual core, and within the two year time frame, a lot of games etc are released that really take advantage of quad core and there I would be stuck since I went with a dual.

Would it be worth it now just to say to hell with it and go with a quad ? Or ?

I added a poll to see what the collective thinks.

And the cpu is the last piece I need to decide on for my new rig on Aug 10.

Thanks

I wasn't getting posts in the General Hardware. So I posted here since its the last part I need

 

[Bateluer]

I'd go with a dual for now, with a solid motherboard. If, in 15 months, you need a C2Q, you'll be able to pick up for cheaper.

 

[firewolfsm]

I only say quad because we simply have no need for higher clocked cores in games.

 

[OCGuy]

Q9450 is EOL and is $279 @ Microcenter.com....Awesome chip.


http://www.microcenter.com/sin...tml?product_id=0287628

 

[Hugh H]

Get a Q9450 and overclock it to a minimum of 3.2Ghz. (just change the FSB to 400 in the BIOS, leave everything else on auto).

That should be plenty of speed for quite some time, plus you got four cores.

Also, keep in mind that on August 10 prices on the quads are supposed to drop, so you might get a cheaper q9450 or even a q9550 for approximately what the q9450 is selling for now.

 

[zerogear]

I'd wait until Q9550

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: zerogear
I'd wait until Q9550 [/quote]




If you mean the price drop, Id take the 9450 and OC it before i'd pay extra for the 9550.

 

[JAG87]

A quad. I don't even think that's a question when you are keeping this for 2 years.

The E8400 will be a piece of shit in two years. Everything will be multi threaded and owning a dual core will feel just like owning a single core today feels.

Think that in two years we will have Gesher, the successor to Nehalem (not the shrink, the shrink is Westmere), and if Nehalem is already a four core - eight thread wood chopper, just think what Gesher will be.. probably eight or 16 cores on 32 nm.

How will a dual core feel when those processors go mainstream? Yuk, I wouldn't wanna be in that person's shoes.

 

[JPB]

Yea, those were kind of my thoughts as well JAG87.

I am deciding now whether to pull the trigger on the Quad 9450.

No dual cores for me. Most of you guys here confirmed my suspicions.

 

[JPB]

I now took out the polls for the dual cores. It just seems irrelevant now :thumbsup:

 

[JPB]

What about this here ? The Xeon variant of the Q9450

Intel Xeon X3350 Yorkfield 2.66GHz

Are there any good reasons why the server variant would be a better buy ?

ROFL I just saw that the Quad 9450 comes with a FREE GAS CARD :laugh:

 

[VirtualLarry]

Quad is definately more future-proof. I would get the Q6600 though, save your money, the 45nm dont have good price-performance. Wait until the high-multy 45nm quads drop in price.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: JPB
What about this here ? The Xeon variant of the Q9450

Intel Xeon X3350 Yorkfield 2.66GHz

Are there any good reasons why the server variant would be a better buy ?

ROFL I just saw that the Quad 9450 comes with a FREE GAS CARD :laugh:

Why pay that much when you can get it for $279?

 

[Denithor]

Actually since he's keeping the chip for ~2 years without an upgrade I would say get the Q9450 because by that time SSE4.1 will probably be instituted widely and you'll miss that entirely with a Q6600.

 

[JPB]

True. There is no reason to purchase the server variant. Was just wondering if it were *manufactured* better than the desktop cpu.

I think the Quad 9450 is the choice :thumbsup:

 

[Drsignguy]

If you can get your hands on the Q9450, do it...great chip and as for your question of 2 years, that chip will probably last longer for your needs anyway.

 

[harpoon84]

Assuming you take the $279 deal, I'd choose the Q9450 if you want it to last for two years, down the line the extra speed and SSE4.1 may come in handy over the Q6600.

 

[tallman45]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Quad is definately more future-proof. I would get the Q6600 though, save your money, the 45nm dont have good price-performance. Wait until the high-multy 45nm quads drop in price.

Q9xx have far better performance per $$ overt the Q6600's . Remember when calculating performance per $$ add in the electricity cost which if you run both stock 24x7 amounts to $8-$10 per month, and A/C costs will be higher as the heat is substantially higher on the Q6600

OC the Q6600 and you will see the cost diff even higher

In 1 years time while the Q6600 was $120 less to purchase you will have spent more

 

[tallman45]

Originally posted by: Drsignguy
If you can get your hands on the Q9450, do it...great chip and as for your question of 2 years, that chip will probably last longer for your needs anyway.

In a week and a half the Q9450 will be discontinued, the cost will either drop or stay at the same price as a Q9550 ( huge price drop on the 9550)

Its best to wait the under 2 weeks and see what develops the extra multiplier is a big advantage as it is across all 4 cores and with a mild OC can be almost a 1Ghz advantage over the Q9450 for the same $$

 

[JPB]

Is the Q9550 really suppose to drop to the price of the Q9450 ? If it is, it is worth waiting for.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: JPB
However, I am now having trouble deciding which CPU to go with. I originally chose the E8400 but after I got to thinking about it...I want to keep this system for at least two years.

My problem is this. What if I go with dual core, and within the two year time frame, a lot of games etc are released that really take advantage of quad core and there I would be stuck since I went with a dual.

Your poll doesn't include a dual-core option but that would be my vote.

Buy yourself a cheap dual-core for now, save your money as well as enjoy a slightly lower electric bill for a while.

In two years (or sooner) you can upgrade your LGA775 system to a quad-core for cheap as the yorkfields become cheaper and cheaper in the face of Nehalem's and Deneb's next year.

 

[stuff311]

Originally posted by: JPB
Is the Q9550 really suppose to drop to the price of the Q9450 ? If it is, it is worth waiting for.

Yes, it is supposed to go down to $316. If you can get a 9450 fro $279 now, though, it would be just as good of a choice. Only thing you're paying for is $36 more bucks for 0.5 more multiplier.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: stuff311

Originally posted by: JPB
Is the Q9550 really suppose to drop to the price of the Q9450 ? If it is, it is worth waiting for.

Yes, it is supposed to go down to $316. If you can get a 9450 fro $279 now, though, it would be just as good of a choice. Only thing you're paying for is $36 more bucks for 0.5 more multiplier.

The Q9450 only saw $316 at a couple places, the Q9550 wont be that low. Intel will hold back supply, and the demand will keep it somewhere near where the 9450 is at most stores.


Whoever said the extra .5 multiplier gives the 9550 a 1ghz OC advantage over the 9450, this is my response to you :

 

[tallman45]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: stuff311

Originally posted by: JPB
Is the Q9550 really suppose to drop to the price of the Q9450 ? If it is, it is worth waiting for.

Yes, it is supposed to go down to $316. If you can get a 9450 fro $279 now, though, it would be just as good of a choice. Only thing you're paying for is $36 more bucks for 0.5 more multiplier.

Whoever said the extra .5 multiplier gives the 9550 a 1ghz OC advantage over the 9450, this is my response to you :

Not sure who said it but it sounds correct

If you OC both the Q9450(8.0) and the Q9550(8.5) the same for example 450fsb

Each Core of Q9450 is running at 3.6ghz TPP (total processing powr) = 14.4 GHZ
Each Core of Q9550 is running at 3.83ghz TPP (total processing powr) = 15.3 GHZ

Diff of .23ghz for each core. X4 cores thats .92MHZ, almost 1ghz more processing power. If you have an app that can use all 4 cores it will utilize that extra 1ghz.

 

[GundamF91]

If you think that extra .5 multiplier is going to push Q9550 to 3.8Ghz, then you better have really good cooling. Regardless of multiplier, the CPU will run really hot at this type of speeds over spec. This is one such situation where you'll be burning that chip up as well as juicing it too much to hit 3.8Ghz. Despite what Intel says, all these CPU are really made on the same waffers, and the ones in the middle will have better yield, the ones on the edge will be worse. but overall it's the same design, and can only go so far when pushed.

Yorkies simply don't overclock like Wolfdales can. If Q9450 and Q9550 are the same price, then most definitely get the 9550, but if there's 10% or more difference, ie. $35 or so, you're better off getting @9450 because it'll likely overclock just as well as Q9550 unless you have really good cooling to keep it on the bleeding edge. It's just like over paying for Q6700 over Q6600 and you don't get much more performance, if any.