Anyone have a Q9650?

I went from a 6850 dual core to a 9550...2.83 processor.... Gaming it wasn't a lot better but using the two programs you mentioned you should see a noticeable improvement. Even simple programs like winzip open up and compile quicker. I noticed it with my mapping programs. 4 cores is the way to go.

Well try this one, for games
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/desktop-cpu-charts...[2180]=on&prod[2185]=on

Thank you!

on the other hand try this benchmark, it compares the Q9650 with the most widely used quad core for gaming the q6600 and the best dual core CPU for gaming ( IMHO ) the E8600. you will be able to see a nice representational of the 3, in all aspects. And with the massive price drop of the q9650, I am actually considering to get one myself.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/desktop-cpu-charts...[2180]=on&prod[2183]=on&prod[2194]=on

Q9650 is a great choice of processor, suitably quick at stock and overclocks well. As someone said, there may not be an immediate improvement in games, but more and more I find myself leaving other programs open which I would never have dreamt of in the past. It's like gaming with less preparation!

I have the Q9650 and it overclocks likes no one's bussness.

I have the QX9650, but without touching the multiplier, was able to hit around 3.6 on just the FSB and voltage increases. It did require a LOT of voltage though, so I had to roll back to ~3.38 again...

what's the difference between the Q9650 & QX9650 except the unlocked multiplier?

$750 and 35 watts.

lol i think you are kind of mixing RAM with CPU aren't you? kind of like a lot of quad fanboys here *cough * silverion *cough*

i should say I had my Q9650 at 4GHz on 1.32v and 58c max.

^damn nice overclock! sounds like its on water though.

nope. It's on air.

Isn't the stable max on air for those things give or take about 4.2 GHz?

Q9650 @ 4.2GHZ 24/7 stable. On water and super quick!

Sweet OC man! 4g's on air at 58C,Is that under load?

I looked at a lot of QX9650 and Q9650 and yea there is no diff.

So If I had a Q9650 at what 3.6GHz it would be faster then a QX9770,And $1100 cheaper,Cool.

But Hay? Someone told me that XP doesn't support Quad? I hear it doesn't use it as good as Vista but is usually still faster? is that true?

And the Q9560 is just 2 E8400's Right? is the Multi still 9X?

Is there anyone With XP and a Q9650 that play's Supreme Commander? if so does it use all 4 core evenly?

Thanks A lot Guy's!

You are some smart guy's!

I ordered Q9650 & GA-P45-UD3P... Can't wait to arrive to see what can you do with it...  
But from your saying it seems I could go to 4GHz on air, so I guess I'll be happy...  

Antiacid, blackpanther. You guys care to shoot me a PM on how you got your Q9650's stable @ 4ghz on youre P5Q Pros? I have the Xeon X3370 which is the same thing, I can get it to 4ghz easily, but keeping it stable is another question.

My issue never was heat (WC took care of that...), its that the voltage required to get beyond 3.5 was above my confort level (1.45). I've toyed around with a lower multiplier, but I'm waiting for a new GFX card to confirm a driver related issue is solved before I give it another go.

Either way, a 500MHz boost on just a FSB increase isn't too bad, and I've heard of people getting 3.8 on air, so maybe the Q9650 OC's a bit better on just the FSB then the QX?

Also, quads run fine on XP. While not as "optimized" as Vista is, due to the fact you have far less running in the background, Quads on XP actaully run a bit faster (Vista has closed the distance since SP1 though).

Personally, if you get a Q(X)9550 or 9650, you should be good through the next major CPU cycle (Sandy Bridge in 2011)

Hay cool than you vary much.

I'm not to sure about the Voltage on the Q9650 as I don't have one,but I do know it took 1.45 V to hit 4.5GHz on my E8400 so I'm sure the Q9650 is much higher.

Thanks!