q9550 to replace e8400

ntemples1

Member
Sep 8, 2006
37
0
0
Hi all let me explain, I currently have a C0 version of E8400, I used to run it overclocked at 3.82 but it has been unstable recenlty so I have had to drop it down to 3.7 stable (1.38), this processor will NOT go any further even with a huge voltage shoved into it.

So what I am thinking is getting a q9550 from ebuyer (they are £217 atm) and swapping them over, it will be an e0 version and should overclock to at least match the E8400..

So will I notice any difference at all?

I probably will got the i7 route but not for at least 2 years
 

ntemples1

Member
Sep 8, 2006
37
0
0
to be honest i can't remember, but i do remember that it was below 60, i think it was like 55ish, but no matter what i did it won't go 4ghz but now it's not even stable t 3.82 so i am at 3.7ghz, this is using an arctic freezer 7 pro. but I am thinking it is because i have a c0 revision of the e8400, and also as my motherboard over-volted in the beginning maybe it has damaged the chip?
I am really interested in getting a q9550 e0 revision or for £50 more a q9650....... any advice thankfuly recieved!! :eek:)
 
Dec 24, 2008
192
0
0
most likely not due to the motherboard, but I would try a better cooler just to be sure that it can't go further. And also, do you have good chipset cooling? and also, a Q9550 won't gain much under normal circumstances with single threaded apps. If you really have to, get the Q9550, the Q9650 only have a higher stock rating, not a higher overclocking ability
 

BoboKatt

Senior member
Nov 18, 2004
529
0
0
Yup I replaced my dual core for a q9550. However I snagged mine before the E0 version was released so mine is the original C1.

I believe really all of them are great overclockers nevertheless. Mine without raising its stock voltage, would hit 3.4 rock stable. I am currently running it at 3.83 (450ish fsb x 8.5) and I am at 1.275 in bios with loadline calibration on and using a TRUE for cooling. Sits at around 35-38 on all 4 cores idle (which really is not that good but I really have to reset my true and apply better thermal compound) and if I let it prime for 6-8 hours, it goes over 60c on all 4 cores and then settles back down around 58-59. I am using an older Asus P5KE-wifi (P35 chipset) and I am still amazed at how good that mobo is. I bought a newer PQ5-SE but have not tried that CPU in that board as of yet.

Anyhow I love it to death -- so much so I replaced the e6600 in my HTPC and put in a Q6600 G0. I am addicted to all things quad now :). However again it depends what you do with it. Half my computer time is spent encoding and those bloody 4 cores really do help, along with the push in FSB. I don't game much except for... Everquest (yah I know.. OLD). But when I do, I run 3 instances of that game at 1920x1200 with full glory on along with usually 4 to 5 other apps running in the background? at times even decoding in the back or compiling and I never get a hiccup while playing. Not to say the older dual core I had was not competent.


 

ntemples1

Member
Sep 8, 2006
37
0
0
Many thanks for the replies, I think I will get a Q9550 and see how far it goes,, will let you know!
 
Aug 28, 2006
175
0
0
I recently upgraded from an e8400 @ 4.05 to a q9550 @ 3.84 (unfortunately got a C1). I notice a slight improvement, nothing major, but it's mostly a game machine so probably not using much software that supports 4 cores. It was more of an upgrade for my other machine that got the e8400.

 
Nov 26, 2005
15,194
403
126
Did you try upping the PLL NB and FSBt on that 8400? Some minimal increases might help lift the burden of high vcore on that thing and lower heat and help stabilize it at 4ghz. Although anything above 1.3x-vcore will hit 74+*c running Prime in 71 ambients
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,202
216
106
You got a lemon E8400 like mine, it happens mate, it happens, and it does suck.

I can get mine stable at 3.8Ghz, but it requires 1.41v in CPU-z (1.43 vCore in BIOS). It currently sits at 3.75Ghz at 1.40v (CPU-z), the temperates are "fine" though, around 35ºC to 40ºC (depending on ambient room temperature) idle, and up to around 60ºC on load (during Prime95). But not only does it require 1.40v for a mere 750Mhz increase, it also needs +0.20v in both MCH and FSB voltages which is absolutely horrendous of a requirement for stability, but if I don't do it then it won't go beyond 10 minutes in Prime95 or Orthos at Priority 10, and I know that my memory is out of the equation since I've isolated it and tested under both stock and over-clocked speeds in both the Desktop and BIOS (Memtest) and it never gave me a single error.

So... yeah, it happens, the majority of E8400 owners reached good over-clocks, but there are a few batches out there that aren't even worth talking about. I bought mine way back in late 2007 when it was first released, in was the exact same week of its release in fact, and so I got a really sucky batch, while probably more than half of the E8400 owners out there got a good one. I once thought it was my motherboard's fault, but I found out that the same motherboard gave astounding results (many GA-X38-DQ6 and E8400 combos I read about after a mere Google search just made me realize that it was indeed my CPU that was the cause, it's one heck of a giant lemon).

And so, if you really want and especially if you really like to over-clock and you don't feel good enough with your E8400 then yes, I'd say go with a Q9550, or even a Q9650 if you can afford it. I myself am planning on going with either a Q9650 or i7 920 in about two or three months, but I don't think I'll over-clock anymore, I'm sick of bad results and it's probably my fault for buying new CPU's at their release and getting the first and bad batches, I should wait longer and wait for refreshes (such as the E0 stepping) to get better results, or I'm just one unlucky bastard since my first ever attempt at over-clocking with a Pentium 4 many years ago.
 

imported_wired247

Golden Member
Jan 18, 2008
1,184
0
0
Originally posted by: Zenoth
You got a lemon E8400 like mine, it happens mate, it happens, and it does suck.

I can get mine stable at 3.8Ghz, but it requires 1.41v in CPU-z (1.43 vCore in BIOS). It currently sits at 3.75Ghz at 1.40v (CPU-z), the temperates are "fine" though, around 35ºC to 40ºC (depending on ambient room temperature) idle, and up to around 60ºC on load (during Prime95). But not only does it require 1.40v for a mere 750Mhz increase, it also needs +0.20v in both MCH and FSB voltages which is absolutely horrendous of a requirement for stability, but if I don't do it then it won't go beyond 10 minutes in Prime95 or Orthos at Priority 10, and I know that my memory is out of the equation since I've isolated it and tested under both stock and over-clocked speeds in both the Desktop and BIOS (Memtest) and it never gave me a single error.

So... yeah, it happens, the majority of E8400 owners reached good over-clocks, but there are a few batches out there that aren't even worth talking about. I bought mine way back in late 2007 when it was first released, in was the exact same week of its release in fact, and so I got a really sucky batch, while probably more than half of the E8400 owners out there got a good one. I once thought it was my motherboard's fault, but I found out that the same motherboard gave astounding results (many GA-X38-DQ6 and E8400 combos I read about after a mere Google search just made me realize that it was indeed my CPU that was the cause, it's one heck of a giant lemon).

And so, if you really want and especially if you really like to over-clock and you don't feel good enough with your E8400 then yes, I'd say go with a Q9550, or even a Q9650 if you can afford it. I myself am planning on going with either a Q9650 or i7 920 in about two or three months, but I don't think I'll over-clock anymore, I'm sick of bad results and it's probably my fault for buying new CPU's at their release and getting the first and bad batches, I should wait longer and wait for refreshes (such as the E0 stepping) to get better results, or I'm just one unlucky bastard since my first ever attempt at over-clocking with a Pentium 4 many years ago.


This whole thread, but this post specifically, sounds exactly like the same deal for me

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2277312&enterthread=y