Q8200 owners please chime in

[Bman123]

I think I am gonna go with the Q8200 cpu as it is a quad and it is in my price range.
I was wanting some info from fellow Q8200 owners tho.

I was wondering what kind of performance you were getting in games and how is the overclock coming with it.


I need help picking out a good mobo and ram so I can get a decent overclock out of this cpu.I am only running one video card so no need for sli or Xfire.

It would be great if the Q8200 owners could share some info with me so I dont go out and make a stupid purchase on my mobo and ram.I just want to have a good running rig thats all. I am trying to keep my price around $150 max for the board and the ram I figure I should be ok in this price range.

Oh BTW what video card and res are you guys running the Q8200 at

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I responded in a PM, but i decided others might want to talk about it as well. He also asked me about the Q8200 vs E8400 debate, so that's where some parts come from.

Hey!

The Q8200 is solid in games at stock settings. It's exactly or a little smidge faster then the Q6600 at stock.

Take Day of Defeat Source for instance. This game is nearly 100% CPU dependent as long as you have a decent graphics card. I get 60-140fps (usually hangs around 80-100) in a full server on a stock map. With my overclock its always around 80-200fps, usually 120-150 or so.

In this game I noticed a pretty big jump from stock to my overclock. In Crysis it only raised my fps by a few because I was GPU limited. My HD 4830 is always overclocked when i game to 710/970. While its still really fast, some games like Crysis demand raw GPU power. On high settings in Crysis:Warhead @ 1680x1050 its always around 25-40fps, near 30 most of the time.

In present times there is no reason to get a dual core. Some games like GTA4 and Saints Row 2 only run decently on a quad. Even a stock Q6600 beats out an E8400 @ 4ghz in GTA4. Games in the future this will only be amplified.

I paid $199 for my CPU. The E8400 was $184 at the time. I had the money to go all the way up to a Q9550, but the money spent just wasn't worth it. At stock speeds (if you are bit cheap) you are better off going with a Phenom 2. If you overclock, i'd go the Q8400 route. Its only $15 more then the Q8200 and its at 2.66ghz at stock. If i had the Q8400 with my overclock i'd be at 3.44ghz.

Quad cores are the way to go. i7 is still overpriced and "i5" will cost nearly as much while beating out the i7 920. In true scenarios (like ours) unless we had SLI GTX 280's @ 1280x1024, getting anything higher then a Q8x00 or a Phenom 2 won't make a noticeable difference.

I don't recommend the Phenom 2 route so much as the Phenom 2 940 @ 3ghz in some cases gets beat by the Q8200. That's kinda sad to be honest. I also do not recommend the Q9300/Q9400 route as they get the same exact performance as the Q8400.

Cliff version: Get the Q8400. If you really want to save $15 but get 5-10% less performance, get the Q8200.

 

[error8]

The problem with the Q8200, is that for decent overclocking, you need the best motherboard and ram available to man. The 7X multiplier will need a 500 mhz FSB out of your mobo to be able to hit 3.5 ghz and that should be a great and expensive motherboard.

I had the same dilemma some time ago and I had the luck to get a cheap used Q6700, which is much easier to oc and doesn't stress the motherboard that much. From what I'm seeing, the "lowest" quad that you could buy is the Q9400, which overclocks very nice and also has enough cache. I wouldn't go lower then that, if I was to buy a quad from Intel. I'd get a PII 940 instead of a Q8XXX any day.

 

[Bman123]

What mobo and ram is recommended for the Q8200?

 

[error8]

This mobo has good chances for 450-480 mhz FSB on a quad, but it's not guaranteed.

And for ram, whatever 1066 mhz kit you like. For 1:1 DRAM/FSB ratio you need a kit that does 1000 mhz at 500 FSB.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813128359

The Gigabyte EP45-U3DR is one of the budget overclocking kings. Its $119.

You could save $25 and overclock further if you went with the EP43-U3DL and the Q8400. The EP43-U3DL is only $79.99 and appears to be exactly the same thing as my board.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813128380

 

[Bman123]

See error8 you got me wondering if i should pick a different quad cpu due to the low multi.

I didn't think about the low multi,this way I need a high fsb for a good clock speed (ghz)

Should I go with a better quad? This is gonna hamper my budget tho.I mean I can get a Q9550 but then I need to get a gts 250 instead of a gtx 280

Just trying to have a nice sweet rig,I am sure you guys understand.I really appreciate the help,hopefully we can figure this all out

 

[error8]

Grab a Q9400. It has an 8X multi. On a 450 FSB you get 3600 mhz. I think that with some luck you can probably squeeze it to 3.8 ghz. At that speed, it would be plenty fast and you should still save enough to be able to get the gtx 280.

 

[Bman123]

Is there a certian mobo I should be looking at now when using the Q9400?

I can still get the gtx 280 I will just save some more cash for it.

Also now what about my ram.If I go with the Q9400 and say at 3.6ghz that would be 450 fsb so my ram would only be at 900mhz.Will I need certian ram or just regualr g skill ddr2 800mhz ram.

 

[Bman123]

According to this the Q9400 isn't that much better then the Q8200 when it comes to gaming

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=52&p2=76

I just found this and I have been looking at alot of differnet combos.

I am sure tho with the Q9400 at 3.6ghz it will make a big difference.It is just interesting to look at the stock clock performance of these quads and duals

 

[fffblackmage]

The Q8400 is only $15 more than the Q8200 at newegg and $40 less than the Q9400. AFAIK the Q9400just has 2MB more L2 cache over the Q8x00.

 

[Bman123]

I have been reading up on xfx mobos and they seem pretty good.
The xfx 680i lt sli mobo has hit 485fsb in a number of reviews I have seen. Cost $100

The XFX 750i sli is $129 Seems like a good board

The xfx 780i is $149

Dont know if there is a big difference between the 750i and 780i besides 3 way sli which is not a option for me at all.(LOL)


Is this board good to your guys knowledge?I have never used sli before but it may be cool to try.I like the looks of this motherboard plus xfx has great customer service.

I am just wasting my time looking at this mobo? It is only $100 new at tiger,

 

[Bman123]

found a good site with alot of 680i/750i info including a fsb of 525 thats nuts

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Bman123
found a good site with alot of 680i/750i info including a fsb of 525 thats nuts

Although it is possible to get a FSB above 500 with a quad, it is generally not the norm. Remember a core2 quad is actually 2 dies sandwiched together, so there may be a bit of resistance.

 

[Bman123]

This is why I was thinking of getting a quad with a higher stock clock.As this way I should be able to get a decent overclock.

I am only looking for 3.6ghz I swear thats all I want.I remember doing a E8400 for a friend before and we saw very little improvement from 3.6ghz to 4ghz
We ended up leaving at 3.6ghz to keep down the heat.

 

[cubeless]

q8200 in an evga 750i running @ 450 fsb 3.1ghz-ish... no stress oc... runs cool under a vendetta2..

great lowbuck sli setup with a couple 8800gt's that i scrounged... runs anything nicely @ 1680x1050...

 

[Bman123]

cubeless I sent you a pm

I donot understand something at all here.Whenever I search for Q8200 I see alot of people saying that the Q8200 is not good for gaming.

When I look up the chart as posted here it seems like it is good,here is a few examples
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=52&p2=56

That is against a E8400.Sure the E8400 is winning most of the game benchmarks but look at far cry 2.This is a game that utilizes more then 2 cores and it shows it.
I cannot help but believe that more games are gonna start taking advantage of the extra cores. Hence me wanting to go with a quad

Here is another example against a Q9400
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=52&p2=76

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: Bman123


I cannot help but believe that more games are gonna start taking advantage of the extra cores. Hence me wanting to go with a quad

I'am with you on this. For example, the only way I found GTA4 to run smooth, was with a quad core. Of course that it's considered a crappy port and so on, but it's a great game that only works well if you have a quad.
I was also surprised to see that NFS Pro Street lost it's stuttering, when I upgraded to my quad. I couldn't make it run smooth no matter what videocard and dual core I've owned, but with my Q6700 it's working perfectly. The problem is that more and more console parts are released every year and these are more dependent of the cpu as they are on the GPU, so the more cores you have the better it will run.
I think we are now at the beginning of the transition from dual to quad core, so for gaming, 4 cores it's starting to shine. So choose your quad, Bman123.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I'll repeat myself, but there's little to no reason to shell out any more money on a Quad past the Q8400. There is a huge point of diminishing returns on Intel processors. The Q9400 is more expensive, yet gets the same performance as the Q8400. The Q9550/9650 are crazy with a huge amount of cache that is not worth 2x the price. The performance gains above the budget quads per clock is only 5-10% and upwards to 30% in crazy cache hungry applications.

This Q8400/Q9400 comparison says all.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=89&p2=76

 

[Bman123]

I think I decided on my build and here it is so far

Q8200
EVGA 750I FTW
OCZ ddr2 1066 2x2
Antec 300
Ante ea650
samsung dvd drive
WD 500g aaks HDD


Still trying to decide on either a Gtx 260 or 9800gtx+
I will be getting a new montior july 3rd as mine is fucked up.What difference will it make if I go to 1440x900 or 1680x1050?

I will really only play call of duty and grid.I figure it would be alot cheaper to go 1440x900 since the 9800gtx+ is only $125 and the monitor will only be $109
Gtx 260 $175 monitor $200

I dont need a huge monitor,that is why I am thinking of the 1440x900 as I am only 1280x720 17inch right now

 

[lopri]

Have you used or do you plan to learn virtual machines? Q8200 lacks hardware virtualization support. Q9400 does. I wouldn't put too much weight on Far Cry 2's built-in benchmark to guage gaming performance.

 

[Schmide]

Since the motherboard for my sisters computer was bad and I had to send it back, I have a few days to play with my q8200. I got my q8200 at Microcenter for 99+tax when it was on sale.

My motherboard (BIOSTAR TForce TP45HP) seems to have a FSB wall at 480 (at least with this q8200)

My settings to get that 480 (FSB Bsel 1333 DDR2 960)

CPU.........+0.1125
ddr..........+0.40
chipset.....+0.325
FSB.........+0.350
core 1 gtl...0.67*VTT
core 2 gtl...0.69*VTT
Mch..........0.64*VTT
CPU PLL.....1.8
ISL...........-15%

Readings
CPU..........1.328v
NB/SB.......1.376v
DDR..........2.19v
FSB .........1.424v

I was trying to find a sweet spot where I can get a reasonable OC without pushing things too far. I kind of like the settings at 450fsb.

It's not that cool a chip. Watercooled at 3.15ghz it reads c1-4 53-57 51-54 48-51 49-51. My q6600 is much cooler at that speed, less than 50 on all cores.

Settings for 450 (FSB Bsel 1333 DDR2 900)

CPU.........+0.10
ddr..........+0.15
chipset.....+0.175
FSB.........+0.20
core 1 gtl...0.67*VTT
core 2 gtl...0.69*VTT
Mch..........0.64*VTT
CPU PLL.....1.6
ISL...........-15%


Readings
CPU..........1.328v
NB/SB.......1.248v
DDR..........2.048v
FSB .........1.288v

So I decided to run it a 480fsb 3.36ghz with the above voltages. Needless to say it did not pass occt for more than a few min.

 

[Markfw]

I vote for Q9400 and the Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3R , it has better chipset and mosfet cooling, and 8 pin power for CPU. The extra cache on the Q9400 will make a difference in some games.