Now even less reason to pay $1000 for a QX

[OCGuy]

Thanks to Sofarfrome in Hot deals, I found that these are supposedly available @ lagoom. Where are the reviews????? I know Aigo played with a ES, but I want to see if there is any real difference between using the multiplier of the QX9650 or pure FSB on the Q9650.


http://www.lagoom.com/INTEL_CP...artinfo-id-583418.html


http://www.lagoom.com/INTEL_CP...rtinfo-id-583460.html#

 

[Hugh H]

Awesome... I think I'm gonna go for a q9650 and wait until later for Nehalem (32nm or so). The only thing is... what's up with the $569 price tag? I thought it was supposed to be $530.

 

[sgrinavi]

I believe that $530 is the tray price in lots of 1000

 

[Foxery]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Where are the reviews????? I know Aigo played with a ES, but I want to see if there is any real difference between using the multiplier of the QX9650 or pure FSB on the Q9650.

There's nothing to review. Nothing's been changed about the product except labeling it 183mhz faster. As for FSB, it's been shown many times that the Core2 architecture is not bus-limited.

 

[n7]

9x multi on the Q9650 is still somewhat crippling...though with a solid mobo & a little luck, you'll do 9x450 = 4+ GHz.

I don't like the price though.
$550-600 is too rich for my poor blood.

I'll stick with my lowly Q6700 or upcoming QX6850, whichever ends up being the better clocker.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Foxery

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Where are the reviews????? I know Aigo played with a ES, but I want to see if there is any real difference between using the multiplier of the QX9650 or pure FSB on the Q9650.

There's nothing to review. Nothing's been changed about the product except labeling it 183mhz faster. As for FSB, it's been shown many times that the Core2 architecture is not bus-limited.

Errr.....a higher multi on a 45nm Quad isnt just changing the label on the box. The Q9300 doesnt overclock the same as the Q9550, because many motherboards hit a wall around 450FSB.

Just as I am interested in how high the E8600 can go on safe voltages compared to the commonly owned E8400, I am for the 9650 over the commonly owned 9450.

 

[rgallant]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Foxery

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Where are the reviews????? I know Aigo played with a ES, but I want to see if there is any real difference between using the multiplier of the QX9650 or pure FSB on the Q9650.

There's nothing to review. Nothing's been changed about the product except labeling it 183mhz faster. As for FSB, it's been shown many times that the Core2 architecture is not bus-limited.

Errr.....a higher multi on a 45nm Quad isnt just changing the label on the box. The Q9300 doesnt overclock the same as the Q9550, because many motherboards hit a wall around 450FSB.

Just as I am interested in how high the E8600 can go on safe voltages compared to the commonly owned E8400, I am for the 9650 over the commonly owned 9450.

Found this a few hours ago a E8600 @ rated Intel volts
-4.4 @ 1.256v

-http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...owthread.php?p=3186032

 

[aigomorla]

X3370 ES aka Xeon labled Q9650

Currently OCCTing @ 4.050 ghz @ 1.38Vcore.


Dayam im in love with anything 9650, except AMD labeled processors.

You guys want screenies?

That xeon finishes my 9650 collection
Absolute monsters in overclocking.

 

[bharatwaja]

QX9650 I have has no problem doing a 460 X 10. but I live in India and the temps here are 30-35 C all day till the month of november... so The CPU is having very high temps on load, (85 C Load, and 60 C Idle)... this is pretty much more than my liking so I have stuck with 420 X 10 for 24x7 use.

I have no doubt that the q9650 will go upto 450X9 easily on air. Afterall, i am using just the Coolermaster Hyper212.....

Although Intel releasing this q9650 in less than an year of QX9650's debut is a lil' heartbreakin to me and other buyers of QX9650... but Still, faster CPUs for lower prices, its always enjoyable!

 

[solog]

Originally posted by: Foxery
There's nothing to review. Nothing's been changed about the product except labeling it 183mhz faster.

No need to jump to conclusions. Its not like you get paid more if you post quicker

 

[solog]

review on the E0 stepping E8600:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...ay/core2duo-e8600.html

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: n7
9x multi on the Q9650 is still somewhat crippling...though with a solid mobo & a little luck, you'll do 9x450 = 4+ GHz.

I don't like the price though.
$550-600 is too rich for my poor blood.

I'll stick with my lowly Q6700 or upcoming QX6850, whichever ends up being the better clocker.

The "Lowly" Q6700 is still a rockin' CPU. I'm actually thinking about getting one before they disappear. That 10x multi is pretty sweet.

 

[Foxery]

Originally posted by: solog

Originally posted by: Foxery
There's nothing to review. Nothing's been changed about the product except labeling it 183mhz faster.

No need to jump to conclusions. Its not like you get paid more if you post quicker

Hmm? Enlighten me if you find a change other than adding 0.5 to the multiplier, which might fly in the face of every other CPU release in the past 15 years.

The new stepping may have improved its electrical properties slightly, allowing it to overclock in the league of... I don't know... a year-old QX9650.

*Oops, it's only 166 mhz faster. Not sure where I pulled 183 from.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Dadofamunky

Originally posted by: n7
9x multi on the Q9650 is still somewhat crippling...though with a solid mobo & a little luck, you'll do 9x450 = 4+ GHz.

I don't like the price though.
$550-600 is too rich for my poor blood.

I'll stick with my lowly Q6700 or upcoming QX6850, whichever ends up being the better clocker.

The "Lowly" Q6700 is still a rockin' CPU. I'm actually thinking about getting one before they disappear. That 10x multi is pretty sweet.

The irony of my 10x multi is that with my current board, it benches better @ 8x438 than 10x350 or 9x389, so i'm running 8x anyway

For my two previous boards though, i woulda been screwed with 8x, so the flexibility of having higher if needed was extremely nice.

 

[solog]

Originally posted by: Foxery
Hmm? Enlighten me if you find a change other than ...

If it matters to you, read the xbit article that was linked above. At least it appears that you are aware that there are changes.

 

[videogames101]

Wow, I really want an e8400 E0 stepping now.