Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Q9300 Q8200 or Q6600 for best performace/power consumption compromise

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 29, 2008 4:37:27 PM

Hi all, what would be the best among those 3 for the best performance\power consumption\cost effectiveness\longevity compromise?
I'm not a gamer or an overclocking fan, but I do need some performance for OS virtualization, multi booting and such, while keeping things cool, quiet and power consumption low. The difference in price between the Q9300 and the Q8200 is pretty marginal, the Q8200 seems to be slowest of the 3, while the Q6600 is almost 25% cheaper, but it consumes more. Which one should I choose?

And while we're at it, which mobo should I choose? I'm thinking Asus P5E


Thanks! :whistle: 
September 29, 2008 4:44:50 PM

1speed said:
Hi all, what would be the best among those 3 for the best performance\power consumption\cost effectiveness\longevity compromise?
I'm not a gamer or an overclocking fan, but I do need some performance for OS virtualization, multi booting and such, while keeping things cool, quiet and power consumption low. The difference in price between the Q9300 and the Q8200 is pretty marginal, the Q8200 seems to be slowest of the 3, while the Q6600 is almost 25% cheaper, but it consumes more. Which one should I choose?


If you plan to overclock, out of those I'd go with the Q6600. If you plan to run at stock, I'd say go with the Q9300. The Yorkfield series should be both cooler and use less power, but can't overclock as well due to the lower multiplier. At stock, the Yorkfield is around 10% faster clock-for-clock, so the stock Q9300 should also be slightly faster than a stock Q6600.
September 29, 2008 5:51:50 PM

1speed said:
I'm not a gamer or an overclocking fan...:


Yo Snarfies....Mr. I don't read posts even when I quote them....he is not going to overclock.

1Speed... Snarfies is correct. The Q6600 CPU is built using the 65nm process where as the Q9300 is built on the 45nm. Undergoing the die shrink, the 45nm CPU will consume less power and produce less heat. The next important thing you want to look at is the cache sizes. You are talking a difference of 6 vs 4 MB of cache between the Q9300 and Q8200. It will make a difference so you want the larger size.

Newegg has the 9300 deactivated though...I haven't been up on my CPUs to know what is out and why they deactivated it but based on your power consumption requirements, the 9300 is the one you are looking for for unless you can live with the more power hungry Q6600.

No, go for this mobo instead. You chose one with an X38 chipset. You only need the P45 chipset, it is a lot cheaper and will perform the same for you.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Related resources
September 29, 2008 5:59:18 PM

Thanks guys :wahoo:  The Asus is looking good, somebody suggested gigabyte takes less power, fact or fiction? :sol: 
a b à CPUs
September 29, 2008 6:32:33 PM

^Fiction, there is no solid proof. Unless you consider +/- 2W a significant difference.
September 29, 2008 7:20:11 PM

The Q9300 fits your needs the best it seems, actually look for the Q9400, it should be around the same price as the Q9300, which is in fact EOL and may be why its not available at Newegg as SpinachEater has found out.
September 30, 2008 8:47:14 AM

Thanks for the read SpinachEater.

ps maybe that negative was me, I'm new to the forum, I gave you a positive to even things out, :) 
September 30, 2008 5:01:49 PM

NP chief....wait...who the!?

October 1, 2008 12:52:44 AM

Lol does that actually count towards anything SpinachEater?

Asus actually wanted to sue gigabyte for some of what they said about the asus power saving being hopeless lol... weird thing is correct me if im wrong dont ASUS actually own some of gigabyte with a deal they did not long back?
October 1, 2008 2:08:04 AM

Well I think your post completely dissapears after 3 thumbs down.
!