TemjinGold
Diamond Member
- Dec 16, 2006
- 3,050
- 65
- 91
Originally posted by: TemjinGold
tenax: Is that without a bios update? I'd love to get one of these if I can get a board that can boot it w/o an update as I don't have another 775 cpu to boot it with.
That's me, and it works great. I now have it running at 3.2ghz and it's not having any issues. Gigabyte's website said the 45nm support was added in bios F3, so I wouldn't count on this board working out of the box unless they've starting shipping them with the new bios.Originally posted by: tenax
Originally posted by: TemjinGold
tenax: Is that without a bios update? I'd love to get one of these if I can get a board that can boot it w/o an update as I don't have another 775 cpu to boot it with.
here's what the guy at hforum said:
"I'm using the Gigabyte DS3P Rev 2.1 bios F3 with my X3350. It came with bios F1 but I upgraded to F3 while I still had my E6400."
Originally posted by: JonJ
I'm really struggling to understand whether these are differences between a Q9450 and an X3350. I've read that there is no difference other than the name, but I've also read posts where users go to great lengths to demonstrate that they behave the same way. If they're the same other than the name, why would anyone want to do that?
Is it all marketing hype - to make the server market believe that they are getting something specific? Or are are there some subtle difference that will affect the performance depending upon the application?
Originally posted by: n7
Even if there were some incredibly slight differences, they would be just that: incredibly slight; a non-factor.
Many of us more experienced CPU buyers have been getting Opterons or Xeon for years & years now, as they offer an alternative to the mainstream, sometimes for less, sometimes more, sometimes argued to be better overclockers, sometimes argued to be the same.
One thing's for sure, they certainly are no worse than the Core 2 or Athlon equivalent.
The reason there's so much conflicting info is because there's really no info on this at all.
Neither AMD nor Intel have come out & stated they are the same thing...why would they.
That would cut into their profits, not something they want happening.
I will say there's no reason to be scared of getting a Xeon or Opteron instead...many people have done it before; it's nothing new
Originally posted by: n7
Originally posted by: JonJ
I'm really struggling to understand whether these are differences between a Q9450 and an X3350. I've read that there is no difference other than the name, but I've also read posts where users go to great lengths to demonstrate that they behave the same way. If they're the same other than the name, why would anyone want to do that?
Is it all marketing hype - to make the server market believe that they are getting something specific? Or are are there some subtle difference that will affect the performance depending upon the application?
Even if there were some incredibly slight differences, they would be just that: incredibly slight; a non-factor.
Many of us more experienced CPU buyers have been getting Opterons or Xeon for years & years now, as they offer an alternative to the mainstream, sometimes for less, sometimes more, sometimes argued to be better overclockers, sometimes argued to be the same.
One thing's for sure, they certainly are no worse than the Core 2 or Athlon equivalent.
The reason there's so much conflicting info is because there's really no info on this at all.
Neither AMD nor Intel have come out & stated they are the same thing...why would they.
That would cut into their profits, not something they want happening.
I will say there's no reason to be scared of getting a Xeon or Opteron instead...many people have done it before; it's nothing new
Originally posted by: JonJ
I have received the X3350, and it booted up without any problem in the IP35 Pro, with the pre-installed v.14 BIOS. I subsequently flashed the BIOS to v.16, and it is continuing to run well. It's early days, but I think that the gamble has paid off!