Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Q6600 vs Q9450 (which would u buy? worth premium?)

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 17, 2008 12:34:39 AM

Q6600 ($200) vs Q9450 ($300)

- I am a gamer
- I only upgrade CPU every 4 years.
- I like to be future proof, but not at the expense of unjustified premiums. Especially, if in the long run there is really no real world difference in the 2 products.


Questions:

- Which would u buy and why?
- Is Q9450 worth the $100 premium over the Q6600?
a b à CPUs
May 17, 2008 2:05:31 AM

good advice.

Please read the other threads on this topic ... there must be at least 15 by now ... use the search box at the top of the forum page.

Hope this helps.
May 17, 2008 2:51:36 AM

hmmm well if the Q9450 will significantly be more future proff than a Q6600...maybe the $100 is worth it....arg...but if the perforamnce difference is only like %5...i dont see why ppl would spend 100$ for it.
Related resources
May 17, 2008 3:09:42 AM

If you are talking raw performance / price, you can't beat the Q6600. Yes the Q9450 is faster, but no, its not as good price to performance. In the end its up to you if the extra cache and core improvements are worth the 100 bucks. I know that doesn't make it any easier for you, but, if it was me i'd take the Q9450, those 45nm chips run very cool even in comparison to a G0 Q6600.
May 17, 2008 3:15:22 AM

Find a cheap QX6 series chip if you can, if not buy the Q9450, has the same number of transistors as a dual core, that's why the price is alot lower than a QX chip. Intel wouldn't allow you to pay half price for the same thing.
May 17, 2008 3:18:49 AM

Quote:
haha i just explained why its better you still dont see??? lol if you dont do alot of video encoding then you dont need the sse4 instructions...if your not going to overclock it till it bleeds then your not really going to benifit from the 45nm technology and if your not really oc'ing then the fsb can go both ways... so you decide now lol


lol thats better.

- I don't encode
- I only OC a little...3.2-3.4
- I am not worried about heat.

Q6600...i think is winning now. =)
May 17, 2008 3:23:00 AM

FHDelux said:
If you are talking raw performance / price, you can't beat the Q6600. Yes the Q9450 is faster, but no, its not as good price to performance. In the end its up to you if the extra cache and core improvements are worth the 100 bucks. I know that doesn't make it any easier for you, but, if it was me i'd take the Q9450, those 45nm chips run very cool even in comparison to a G0 Q6600.


yeah Q6600 is best bang for buck...but its hard to tell if the benefits of the Q9450 over the Q6600 will make me significantly more future proof...

I guess...the 45 vs 65nm wouldnt matter...peroformance-wise.
I guess...the speed won't matter since, they both OC enough for me

The cache DOES matter....if there is a real performance gain from it...

Anything else different between these 2?
May 17, 2008 3:34:56 AM

Well if you are doing just a cpu upgrade, id say go with the q6600, the price performance is great, however, with nehahalem coming out at the end of the year, perhaps you should hang on to what you have and upgrade at years end.
May 17, 2008 3:51:34 AM

what is the expected price of the nahahalem?

i upgrading for Age of Conan btw...it gets released in 3 days..
May 17, 2008 3:54:19 AM

offtopic:

I am going to buy one of these cases in the next day or 2. The price isn't a real issue, since I plan to reuse the case for many years. Please help me select the best one. Which would you buy and why?

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8003BWS
($120): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Thermaltake Armor+MX VH8000BWS
($135): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
The TT Armor+MX physically looks the best to me, however, I wish it had more fans...

Antec Nine Hundred
($80): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

XCLIO A380PLUS-BK($120): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
The case fans on this case are crazy
May 17, 2008 4:31:35 AM

cosmos s is good but $250 >.<
May 17, 2008 5:36:19 AM

Have you considered this:
Based on the Kill-a-Watt readings, there is a tangible difference between between the Power Consumption of a Q6600 vs Q9450 even at idle. This difference gets more pronounced at load, more so when you OC, and especially noticeable in your monthly bills if you keep your PC on 24/7.

You may quite possibly end up paying more than $100 in electricity costs over 4 years (48 months) ($2/mo; less than $0.10 per day).

If you are not responsible for the electricity bills, then go with whatever is more cost effective as both chips are excellent. Otherwise, look into the electricity usage. =)
a c 448 à CPUs
May 17, 2008 6:55:50 AM

Yeah, the price per KWH can add up over time. I think I am paying $0.20 per KWH in NYC.

Anywaste, regardless of power consumption:

Pure gaming ==> Q6600
Video editing / encoding ==> Q9450
May 17, 2008 7:51:36 AM

I have a cosmos s and basically I havent ever seen a better case. It's ready for water cooling for provision for 3 fans up top and area for radiator, has a massive side panel fan and holes with gromets for piping and is ATX extended. The psu goes down the bottom and has its own washable dust filter. Sure you can get cheaper cases, but really when you get everything the cosmos s offers, its super value for money, my advice is go and check one out in person. It's tooless, very very sexy and the hardrive cage has its own fan etc etc etc etc. Too much to mention.
May 17, 2008 10:58:49 AM

They're both quad cores and they can both be overclocked. Given the bargain basement price of the Q6600 ( http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml... ) it's hard to justify the Q9450's $$$ premium unless your time is truly money and the more time you save the more money you make. Otherwise, I think the performance increase of the Q9450 is luxury...but there's nothing wrong with luxury if that's how you want to spend your $$$. I did.
May 17, 2008 4:13:18 PM

how much better performance would u said I can get out of an OC 9450 vs an OC 6600? I do not video edit...just gaming and normal stuff.
May 17, 2008 4:15:06 PM

Quote:
lmao i guess money is a issue huh haha yea i know 250 is alot but ull never have to upgrade your case again... i think if not get the 1200 bro its big enough and has more than enough airflow

i really like the antec 1200..but thats $220....my price range on a case max is like $150...
May 18, 2008 3:21:51 PM

Well the Q9450 runs at 1333 vs 1066, thats a ~25% gain. If you match it with 1333 ram thats another ~25%. One runs at 2.4 the other at 2.66. One has 8mb cahce the other 12mb. It runs cooler, have alook at all these posts with people complaing about 65nm tempreatures. Problem? Yes. The Q9450 has a locked multiplier of 8, which means you need to put more volts through it for a gain ie 450 mhz x 8 for 3.6. Some boards do this well and some don't, you have to research this and buy good ram. If you don't think a stock Q9450 is worth an extra $100 you need a brain transplant.
May 18, 2008 8:52:50 PM

Q6600 @3.2 vs Q9450@3.2 ...now can someone tell me the % performance difference in games and normal use? (not video encoding)

I would image 5-7%...if that is the case ill save my $100.
!