Q9300 review up over @ X-bit labs

[AmberClad]

Q9300 review

Those of you who were hoping to get 4.0GHz+ on this baby might be disappointed - the sample they got topped out at 3.4-3.5GHz.

 

[Shortass]

Pretty decent power consumption, at least. A solid choice for F@H enthusiasts

 

[MarcVenice]

Higher FSB and lower multiplier is the devil. I thought a few mobo's were capable of 500fsb though, but apparently qauds have more trouble doing high fsb's ? This kinda stinks, because even if your mobo does 500fsb, you're gonna need ram running at 1000mhz as well, and even then you will top out at 3.75ghz, no slug of course, but overclocking a q6600 would be a lot easier. I sure hope Intel doesn't keep this up, I really want a e8400 or q6600 right now, but can't justify it yet, but if these new chips suck at overclocking I'm going to cry

 

[BlueAcolyte]

It only overclocks to 3.5GHz with 12mb cache... Boo-hoo. Is all this power really needed? Intel's job is to fool as many customers into thinking they need a quad-core for minesweeper as possible. If this solution sells better, why do they need to cater to the enthusiasts? I thought you wouldn't notice a difference above 3.2GHz anyway.

Plus, of course quads are worse at OCing. You are supporting effectively two CPUs compared to a dual-core and they are packed into the same space and getting less voltage.

 

[tenax]

well, i saw this coming, i have to say..low power consumption and multi-tasking are going to be the mainstays of the new quads..interesting though in that it may make the quad 6600 more valuable..and the 9550 make just become the anticipated sweet spot rather than the 9450 that many were thinking for that extra .5 multi. for my purposes, while i'll see how high an overclock i can do with a 9450, that's not why i'm buying it..a mild overclock to 3 gig from 2.66 will be fine for me with my htpc..and i'll have low temps, a stable box and do everything i want to do with a quad core and call it a day

i have a 9450 on hand to play with..but it won't run on my gigabyte p35 ds4 (no post despite all attempts and the latest bios which should be compatible). i bought an abit ip35 pro that i'm going to put together as a benchtester in about..ohhhhh, half an hour. if it boots then some testing should happen later today

 

[tenax]

blue, i wonder how much of the issue will be the strain of fsb on the northbridge with 4 cores..i've been reading about that a lot lately?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: tenax
i have a 9450 on hand to play with..but it won't run on my gigabyte p35 ds4 (no post despite all attempts and the latest bios which should be compatible). i bought an abit ip35 pro that i'm going to put together as a benchtester in about..ohhhhh, half an hour. if it boots then some testing should happen later today

That's interesting. I was planning on a build for a friend involving a Q9450 and a Gigabyte P35-DS4. Is your CPU an ES or retail sample? I wonder if the C1 step will be better.

 

[tenax]

Hi Larry..sorry i didn't get back to you earlier..it's been a heck of a day that involved, i kid you not..4 computers, but it's done and the 9450 quad is up and running on an abit ip-35 pro. it was an easy build..once i got the right bios (beta 16 version 9 or something like that. very latest available from abit today.) beta 16 version 4 worked as well, but i decided to go for the latest. the cpu shows 4 cores etc in cpu-z and task manage so all's working..but the description on boot simply says genuine intel processor but it came up at the right speed. unfortunately, one of the biggest things i wanted to check was the temperatures on the cores, but they are all out of whack..i'm quite sure the quad is not running at 212C TAT doesn't read it, core temp does but same as the bios..about 212C. system temps appear fine. core voltage is i believe 12.325 in bios, 12.30 in cpu-z. wish i could get the real temps hope you can see this picture ok and sorry about the long link here. i'm not very well versed in capturing and modding images

<a href="http://s200.photobucket.com/al...w¤t=9450cpuz.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i200.photobucket.com/al...3/tenax66/9450cpuz.jpg" border="0" alt="9450cpuzfeb1008"></a>

i'm very disappointed i couldn't get it to boot with the ds4..the bioses have supposedly been quad capable for about 4 versions. but, no dice...and no enthusiast forum like abit it..if not for them, i probably would have had no luck with the abit

ps, larry..it's an ES...interesting thing is if you look at the datasheet, not a lot has been done with it, it would appear to my eyes...the one severe errata was it appears something to do with the QX9650, not the lower 9000s. tomorrow, plan to give it some push and see what it'll do

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: BlueAcolyte
It only overclocks to 3.5GHz with 12mb cache... Boo-hoo.

Q9300 has only 2 x 3MB of cache for 6MB total...this wouldn't be so bad if it had a lower FSB and higher multiplier, then it would definitely be far more enticing as right now 3.5GHz with 6MB of cache isn't all that impressive.