- Apr 6, 2014
- 572
- 0
- 5,060
QX6700 vs Q9300
- Thread starter Ibreakthings
- Start date
Solution
Barney6262
Honorable
- Oct 20, 2013
- 989
- 0
- 11,360
45nm is ,technically speaking, better. I'm sure some idiots will claim it is hotter or something, but they are shrinking it year by year for a reason: It's better.
However, when compared, each option has some advantages over the other. Please have a read through this, I hope it helps you make a decision.
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core2-Quad-Q9300-vs-Intel-Core2-QX6700
However, when compared, each option has some advantages over the other. Please have a read through this, I hope it helps you make a decision.
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core2-Quad-Q9300-vs-Intel-Core2-QX6700
- May 27, 2010
- 25,841
- 4,188
- 139,340
If you are talking used, why not a Q9550 or better?
Q9300 has a higher FSB frequency at 1333, but only 6MB of cache. Less power requirement.
QX6700 runs at 1066, but with 8MB of cache. Higher power requirement
After overclocking, it would probably go to the Q9300 since you can manage a little higher clock with the temperature, and the IPC would be a little better.
Q9300 has a higher FSB frequency at 1333, but only 6MB of cache. Less power requirement.
QX6700 runs at 1066, but with 8MB of cache. Higher power requirement
After overclocking, it would probably go to the Q9300 since you can manage a little higher clock with the temperature, and the IPC would be a little better.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Question Display no signal when 1440P or higher full screen gaming- Started by Wouter_U
- Replies: 3
-
Question Download speed is slow on only my PC - please help!- Started by Ograsmium
- Replies: 16
Latest posts
-
-
Question Buying a rtx 3070 for 1080p high settings. Does it make sense?- Latest: Ramiro.Giorgi
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram