should i upgrade to the Q9450 from a Q6600?

[maverick7]

i have the following specs

Q6600 @3GHz thermalright ultra
8800gts 512mb
2gb corsair ram ddr2-800 4-4-4-12
700 watt psu
2x wd 500gb hard drives
asus maximus formula

All this hype is really getting to me, seeing these insane OC numbers just makes me want to upgrade. Even though its only like a 6% increase clock for clock over the conroe processors the fact u can oc it to the sky and beyond really is a selling point for me. I dont have a ton of money since i just bought this pc, and im saving for the 9800GTX. But escpecially when the 9800GTX comes out, i would imagine that even a 3GHz Q6600 will be a bottleneck for it. So is it worth the $400 or so to upgrade?? and if i do, who would i sell my Q6600 to? or rather how would i sell it?

thanks

 

[chookman]

i would have said more money than sense but you plainly state that you dont have the money...

NOT WORTH IT DUDE. stay with the Q6600 especially seeing as its running at 3ghz fine. It will be a monster of a CPU for a while yet and wont be bottlenecked by any sorta GPU in games for a long while after that.

 

[plguzman]

Well, save for the 9800GTX. I don't think you will see any app to run faster because of that. Personally I think I will hold until Nehalem to upgrade.

 

[dragonsprayer]

yes - most people no!

since you can run high fsb but the ram timings may be a challenge - corsair shoud work.

you need a really high fsb to high 3.6+ sweet spot

 

[dragonsprayer]

set your system 1.475v and turn off the Vdroop - its in the bios look it up

you need 1.43-1.45 for stable 3.61ghz oc

anything is less is a waste with the Q6600 go

below 1.43 at max load you have issues - the q6600 go consistently clocks 100% infinitely stable with p35/x38

you need 1.43+ v once at 1.45v every chip is stable - that i have tested and its quite a few!

 

[maverick7]

so i would need faster ram to hit a higher oc?

 

[hcforde]

Just my 2 cents worth

That would in all essence be a lateral move, not really an upgrade.

Thats all!!!

 

[StevieD]

a couple % points of improvement. Big whoop. Cost versus benefit ratio is out of wack.

Stay with the Quad until Nehalem.

 

[Guest]

Also - because you are using the Maximus Formula you might want to keep an eye on the 3870x2 or the next AMD card after that one.

Then you can at least run 2 of them side by side if you ever feel the need. You can't run 2 separate Nvidia cards on that motherboard.

(That's my plan anyway)

 

[tamalero]

unless he decodes a lot of video in divx and similars, shouldnt he get the penryns?

 

[jaguarskx]

Minor performance increase does not justify an "upgrade" to the Q9450.

The Q6600 should not bottleneck the 9800GTX.

 

[yomamafor1]

Absolutely no. Save the money for another card, or upgrade your current GPU.

Here is the math:
In order to run 3.6Ghz on Q9450, you need a FSB of 450Mhz, which is pretty near the FSB wall on the Quads (~475Mhz). At that level, it requires roughly the same voltage, and dissipates roughly the same amount of heat. You probably also need better RAMs, if your Corsair can't clock at 900Mhz (although they should be able to)

On Q6600 however, you only need 400Mhz, and 800Mhz RAM to do 3.6Ghz, and on air.

Here is the bottom line: Unless you only want to run your CPU at close to stock, Q9450 really doesn't look like an attractive upgrade. A lot of enthusiasts still stay with Q6600 due to its overclockability, while the rest purchase Q9650 to actually reap 45nm HKMG's benefits.

 

[evolmonster]

Hiya guys

I have heard alot about the 45nm Quads in this forum. Is the Q9650 a better bet for a new build, over the Q6600?
It'll probably cost a bit more, i'm guessing, but I'd rather get the best I can now.

 

[yomamafor1]

If you can afford a QX9650 (which costs 1000USD), then go for it. Other than that, if you are planning at least some moderate OC (20~40%), then stick with Q6600.

 

[runswindows95]

Not worth the cost really.