NuclearCrap

I've seen way too many people being convinced about Yorkfields by the paper. I, however, oppose going to 45nm at all, yet.

Price vs. Specs

Think about it, what do you get from and for how much can you get a Q6600 these days? A Q6600 is about $270-$280 on average and it's almost certain that the B3 stock has been flushed so you can be safe to assume that it's a G0. It does come with a 1066MHz FSB and most importantly, a 9x multiplier.

Now looking at the 45nm version we can throw out the Q9300 as it has less L2 cache (only 6MB) and a 7x multiplier. The only comparable quad would be a Q9450 it seems, with 12MB L2 cache and 1333MHz FSB. Given that Q6600 wasn't exactly priced at what the early chart said ($266) because then you'd have to buy so many of them, it's pretty safe to assume a Q9450 would be around $350 when it surfaces.

We've seen so many 45nm quads (or was it merely a few?) getting 4GHz on air. That all sounds good, don't you think?

Overclocking

I doubt it can be as good. Why would an overclocker care for 1066MHz vs 1333MHz FSB first of all? As you overclock that levels out. At 3.6GHz (450x8) both the Q6600 and Q9450 would be on 1800MHz anyway.

Now look at the multiplier. Apparently there is no way to get 9x multiplier on a 45nm quad unless you go all out and buy a QX9650 or QX9770 which most of us won't. Even with a $500+ Q9550 you would still be getting a 8.5x multiplier. (edited 2-22-08) Unless you buy the Q9650 for over $500, you'll never get that 9x multiplier. Even with the Q9550 you only get 8.5x.

Of course then you would think: "Who cares? They still overclock better." No, they won't overclock better. Earlier, CD posted about how Wolfdales aren't hitting the magical 4GHz, and both Wolfdale and Yorkfield are on the C0 stepping, so why would anyone think the quad would overclock better than the dual if they're on the same core stepping? Nevermind that, add in the 8x multiplier. Are you certain your motherboard can achieve 500FSB on a quad? After all that's what it takes to hit 4GHz. With a 9x multiplier you'd only need 445FSB.

It's pretty obvious those 4GHz on air chips were cherry picked.

But there's one more reason: voltage. You have to realize that if you use what you think is the max safe 24/7 voltage on a 65nm on a 45nm, you can potentially damage the chip. It's know for a long time that 45nm makes these chips much more sensitive to higher voltages. So therefore, you might be limited even more on overclocking if you want it to live.

(Added 2-22-08) Seen the latest user reports on 45nm chips yet? They appear to get damaged from slightly higher voltages fairly easily, as we all expected (Ok, maybe some of us). 1.38-1.39V is really the max safe 24/7 voltage with 45nm, and that's just enough to get the average E8400 to 4GHz (with a few good ones that can do it with less voltage). We all know that higher FSB will require a bit more voltage even if it ends up to be the same clocks. How much voltage do you think it would take for the Q9450 to do 4GHz? Remember that the E8400 only needs 445x9 while the Q9450 would need a whopping 500x8. Even if your board can pull that on a quad, the stable voltage for that might not be safe enough to run 24/7. So what's the point of spending $100 more on the Q9450 when the Q6600 can achieve similar results on safe 65nm voltage? Then the question strikes me again: Does the 2-5% improvement clock for clock really worth nearly 50% extra money?

(Added 3/23/08) We finally have a member with a Q9450 on hand. And here he is: http://www.overclock.net/3561058-post509.html
1.6V for 4.15GHz? I wonder what it'll do at 1.35V, the max 24/7 voltage for 45nm.

Why?

Why buy a 45nm quad now? SSE4 isn't gonna be implemented in major, everyday applications anytime soon, and the extra 4MB L2 would make a minimal, unnoticeable performance difference in real world applications. Certainly you wouldn't enjoy overclocking it as much either.

If anything, don't even wait for the next core revision, wait for the marriage of a higher multiplier and better core revision. By then, wouldn't we be close enough to Nehalem to not waste more money on a shrinked version of what we already have?

For now, the Q6600 is the best quad overall.

Wolfdale vs Yorkfield vs Kentsfield *New section*

This part should make it very clear why you shouldn't get a Yorkfield.

Since the only so-called "worthy" 45nm quad is the Q9450 due to it being the lowest priced 45nm quad with 12MB L2 cache, we'll use that to represent the Yorkfield. Both the E8200 and E8400 will represent Wolfdale, and Q6600 will represent Kentsfield.

Let's start with the E8400. There's no doubt that this is the best dual core release since the early good batches of the E6600. With a 9x multiplier and 45nm shrink, it's a sure win if you're in the market of getting a dual core, especially with the not low, but reasonable price tag of roughly $220. It's actually that 4GHz 45nm chip everyone's been waiting for.

But what about that E8200? Not so good it seems. On average, it's not hitting that 4GHz that you would sell your kidney for. Yes......blame the 8x multiplier. Now that you need 500FSB instead of 445FSB, things can be quite different. Now you're gonna need more voltage, a really good motherboard, and better cooling.

Oh snap, here comes that Q9450, or should I say dual E8200? Given that quads don't overclock as well as their dual core equivalents according to history, I really don't expect that Q9450 to do better. I'm sure that your motherboard won't clock as high either with 2 more cores onboard. Now I really wonder, why would anyone want all this trouble for a whole $100 more than the Q6600?

Q6600 has a 9x multiplier and if anything, it's got a better chance of clocking higher. And you can spend that extra $100 on a kickass cooler, so why not? Remember the days before the E6750 G0 was in your shopping cart? You probably saw a lot of 4GHz results before buying one but you probably never got there. Thanks to the 8x multiplier, not much people were happy with the E6400, E6420, E6750, E8200, and now, most likely, the Q9450.

Does the Q9450 really worth its price then? Your money, your choice. I've given more than enough advice for you to decide. Whether you get one or not, it's your money. Oh by the way, reselling isn't always an easy thing.

True Clock For Clock Comparison (Added 3/23/08)

There's nothing truer. My previous claim about the 45nm's 2-5% advantage over 65nm is proven. I've came across a review comparison the E8400 and E6850 head to head, with both set to 333x9, giving them both a stock speed of 3.0GHz.

And here's the link: http://en.expreview.com/2007/11/30/r...2-duo-e8400/5/

After all, the advantage is only averaging at about 3-4%. However, E8400 is definitely better than the E6850 for the same price and the same multiplier. But when it comes to the quads, Q9450 is indeed $100 more with a lesser multiplier than the Q6600. Even if we factor in the Q9450 being 45nm giving it more overclockability to compensate for the lower multiplier, at it's highest 24/7 overclock it'll most likely perform like a Q6600 at its highest 24/7 overclock.

Extra Info

I also made a list of all the non-Extreme Core 2 CPUs according to their multiplier: http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/...breakdown.html

__________________

DuckieHo

Nehalem will require new motherboard and memory. Plus, you'll be paying top dollar for brand new tech. You can be sure Nehalem prices will drop significantly faster than Penyrn.

__________________
CPUs For Sale
To answer most of your questions: (1) a fridge cannot cool a PC (2) 64-bit OS for over 3GB or so (3) PCIe 2.0 is backwards compatible with PCIe 1.x (4) Resolution, not screen size (5) If you have a question, it is not news (6) Read TOS (7) Report, not respond to Spam (8) Uninstall nTune (9) Single/Non-Modular Rail PSUs are NOT better than Multi-Rail/Modular

CyberDruid

I agree

__________________
I have an Online Store and an inventory of Watercooling and PC Modification supplies. I Custom Build PCs, modify existing PCs, and Scratchbuild Cases, External Coolers and Techstations. I accept commissions for builds and always have room for a new client. My Work is Warrantied for the lifetime of the owner regarding workmanship and materials. If you are wanting a solid turnkey build with custom features drop me a PMEverything You Ever Wanted to Know About CyberDruid

i_ame_killer_2

If you already have a G0 q6600, then keep it.

If you dont have a quad or have a B3 Q6600, get the 45nm quad.

And BTW I agree.

The ES CPUs was cherry picked.

__________________

Mootsfox

The B3's clock just as high, especially when they are cooled well (water), i_ame_killer_2. Not to say the G0 isn't better, but I don't think it's worth buying a new CPU over if you have a B3.

Great post Nuclear, you swayed me.

__________________

Robilar

Druid, was your prior set of posts not related only to the Dual core 45nm chips and not the quads?

Other than the QX9650 and the odd ES quad floating around, there hasn't been much data to draw such an early comparison.

__________________
Asus P5N32-E Overclocking Guide:http://www.overclock.net/intel-mothe...ing-guide.html

EVGA 780i Overclocking Guide:http://www.overclock.net/intel-mothe...ing-guide.html

EVGA 790i Ultra Overclocking Guide:http://www.overclock.net/intel-mothe...0i-thread.html

adamjc9683

Well, I think you just saved me quite a bit of frustration, as well as about 2 months of waiting to get my build going. I had been debating waiting for the Q9450 because of the larger L2 and it's supposed better overclockablility. As the new rig will be mostly used for gaming, I was hearing that the Q9450 would be worth the wait for both of these reasons, but now I'm not so sure. The only struggle I'm having now is that I will be running 2 GTXs in SLI, and really don't want to deal with the 680i/Q6600 issues that plague all the forums. ARRRRGGHHHH. Good post though man, at least it gives me something ELSE to dwell on for a bit.

i_ame_killer_2

Yeah, it depends on the cooler you have. But in most cases you wont get to 3.5 GHz with a B3 on air (24/7).

__________________

linskingdom

It may be a good investmentor may be not. Let's wait few weeks and let the result speaks itself.

__________________
Push the limit one more time ...

Intel Penryn (45nm) Thread| GeForce 9 Series GPU Thread
The Intel E1xxx/E2xxx Configuration Thread| 8800GT Information Thread
VMark Beta Testing Thread|GeForce GTX200 GPU Thread
E2200 -> 3740MHz E2180 -> 3920MHz E2160 -> 3620MHz

khurios2000

what about 45nm Dual?
i've seen a few store selling $200 a pop for E8400, (9x333) 3Ghz