What is the coolest running cpu out there?

[happy medium]

Originally posted by: ingeborgdot
I <<need a quad core because I do much video editing that puts a lot of strain on the cpu. I will do just a slight oc. I don't like to go more than .4 from what it was. I don't care if amd or intel at this point. I want speed and power with cool if that can be had. It will be an air cooled fan (non stock).

Lowest Quad core power and temps belong to the 65 watt Q8200s and for a bit more power the 65 watt Q9400s or Q9550s

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819115208

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...16819115209&Tpk=q9400s

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...16819115210&Tpk=q9550s

review


http://www.tomshardware.com/re...ore-2-q9550s,2162.html

 

[dmh1167]

Love my Q9550 3.8 GHZ OC on air runs night and day no issues have seen this over clocked to 4 GHZ on air but I dont want to thrash it

 

[ingeborgdot]

How would the last two the 9400 and the 9550 be for speed and heat compared to my Q6600? I have it OC to 2.8. Thanks.

 

[happy medium]

A <stock Q9550 @ 2.83 will be 7% faster then your Q6600 @ 2.8 because of it's 12mb of cache. It should also run about 20% cooler because it's made on the new 45nm process.

The 65 watt Q9550S version runs the same speed as the 95watt Q9550 but runs even 15% cooler. Does the 15% cooler Q9550S warrent the $80.00 difference in price? I would think not, but thats up to you.

On average you can overclock a Q9550 to 3.2 easily on stock voltages and it still will run much cooler then your Q6600 @ 2.8.

If it were me I'd go for the cheaper 95 watt Q9550 cpu and save $80 bucks compared to the 65 watt Q9550S version.

270.00$ Q9550 95 watt version here.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819115041

350.00$ Q9550S 65watt version here.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...16819115210&Tpk=q9550s

You said the fastest, coolest running quad which is the Q9550S but is it worth the price premium?

 

[faxon]

you could probably just get a damn Q9650 for $340ish and underclock/undervolt it to 9550 speeds and get the same result lol. hell there's a good chance that's what intel is doing lol. my Q9650 runs pretty hot with the stock cooler (Megahalem's arrives on the 15th), so i knocked the FSB back a bit to take some of the heat off since the noticed gains in minimum FPS in FC2 over my e5200 @ 3.2ghz were nothing short of significant, as that's all im doing with it besides running lots of low CPU VMs (im taking a server 2008 infrastructure and active directory administration class based on the MCTS line of courses) until i get my cooler. i would have to say that with how much the temps dropped by running the CPU at 1.01v~ @ about 2.7ghz~ that it might be a better pick for the money than a Q9550S, due to the increased flexibility and the option for better overclockability or underclockability + undervolting. If he needs a quads performance though at cool operating temperatures a good cooler will be a must though. i wouldnt get anything less than an S-1283 for stock operation, or a megahelms/TRUE for OCing.

also something to consider is i noticed significant temperature gains going from 333x9 to 500x6 when i was trying to do some FSB stress tests on my motherboard. i had thermal shutoff tagged at 90c, and with OCCT linX it took just long enough for the temperature sensor on my hottest core to register 92c @ 500x6 (3ghz stock @ stock cpu voltage) before it shut down. now ironically, the cpu only gets up to about 82c after a good 20s under LinX at stock FSB speeds and 9 multi, which would lead me to believe that underclocking the cpu via the FSB will actually net a more significant drop in temperatures than by simply knocking back the multi, which also corresponds to what im seeing right now. i cant report accurate temps right now though since im installing multiple VMs to separate hard disks using 4 different installers (2 DVD drives + 2 Daemon tools virtual drives, got MSDN .iso copies from school), so my temperature results for feeding all that to 4 separate hard disks from 2 other hard disks and 2 dvd drives are a bit skewed at the moment

 

[BonzaiDuck]

[I always knew AigoMorla was a "hot-dawg," but "Gee-Whiz!" Aigo -- how many machines do you have running, and what's your electric bill? There was once a time when many Americans traded in their cars every one to three years. How many computer-builds do you go through in a year? :beer: :beer: :beer: ]

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
[I always knew AigoMorla was a "hot-dawg," but "Gee-Whiz!" Aigo -- how many machines do you have running, and what's your electric bill? There was once a time when many Americans traded in their cars every one to three years. How many computer-builds do you go through in a year? :beer: :beer: :beer: ]

I know that I'm not as cutting-edge as aigo, but I got the upgrade bug bad over the last two years. Spent over $3500 at NewEgg during that time.

And to think, there was really nothing wrong at all with my Athlon XP machine. I just wanted a C2D. Then the upgrade madness started.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: jandlecack
Yeah the i7's do run hotter according to specs than Core 2's. Their TJMax is I believe 100C which is quite a lot for a 45nm chip. I think the Core 2 TJMax is 90C. If you run Linx (like IntelBurn) on a Core i7 with air cooling at voltages around 1.3-1.35V you are likely to see temps of 78-86C for the cores.

With my current "day-to-day" overclock at 3.2GHZ, 1.18Vc, 1.2Vq, the highest a core got in Linx 1.5GB was 60 degrees. At 3.8GHZ+Turbo or 4GHZ It goes up another 10-15C each, with 1.3xV or 1.25V and LLC enabled. I've got pretty good airflow in my case though and I've seen temps a lot hotter for other users.

i thought c2 tjmax was 105 c

 

[ingeborgdot]

Originally posted by: happy medium
A <<stock Q9550 @ 2.83 will be 7% faster then your Q6600 @ 2.8 because of it's 12mb of cache. It should also run about 20% cooler because it's made on the new 45nm process.

The 65 watt Q9550S version runs the same speed as the 95watt Q9550 but runs even 15% cooler. Does the 15% cooler Q9550S warrent the $80.00 difference in price? I would think not, but thats up to you.

On average you can overclock a Q9550 to 3.2 easily on stock voltages and it still will run much cooler then your Q6600 @ 2.8.

If it were me I'd go for the cheaper 95 watt Q9550 cpu and save $80 bucks compared to the 65 watt Q9550S version.

270.00$ Q9550 95 watt version here.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819115041

350.00$ Q9550S 65watt version here.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...16819115210&Tpk=q9550s

You said the fastest, coolest running quad which is the Q9550S but is it worth the price premium?

It appears the 65w version is deactivated.

 

[happy medium]

Q9550s

http://www.provantage.com/inte...569q9550s~7ITEP311.htm

Q9400s

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819115209