Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel - General › Q9400 VS Q6600
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Q9400 VS Q6600 - Page 3

post #21 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2thAche View Post

Limiting factor on the Q9400 will be FSB.
Limiting factor on the Q6600 will be power delivery.
I killed a G31 board with my Q6600, ran OCCT at 3.6/1.5V and about 30 minutes in the board died (with smoke).
I'd say the Q6600 is stil the best bet at whatever the highest OC OP can do with 1.4V and alot of air.

It's too risky. I'd say the Q9400 is the best bet.

Clock for clock at the same FSB the 45nm chips win most of the benchmarks.

See here the Core 2 Extreme X6800 vs the Core 2 Duo E7500, both run at 2.93 Ghz with a 1066 FSB. I can't find any benchmarks that compare 65nm 2 x 4 MB L2 cache vs 45nm 2 x 3 MB of L2 cache Core 2 Quads at the same clocks, but this is a good indication.

And then you have to factor in the RAM speeds. Ideally you should leave it at stock, so a 3.2 Ghz clockspeed for the Q9400 with a 1600 Mhz FSB and the RAM in sync would be the best bet, or the Q6600 at either 3.2 Ghz (8 x 400) or 3.4 Ghz (8.5 x 400). I doubt you can get to 3.6 Ghz with a voltage that won't blow up your motherboard or throttle the CPU, so 3.2 or 3.4 Ghz are the best options. At 3.2 the Q6600 would lose most of the benchmarks against the Q9400 at 3.2 Ghz, so that would leave the 3.4 Ghz mark, but can you get it stable with voltage that won't kill the motherboard or throttling that won't lower its performance, and performance wise will it be any faster ? Perhaps a little, but with a 200 Mhz clockspeed difference I doubt there would be much difference that would warrant you take all those risks. The Q9400 runs cooler, uses less power, the fans can spin at a lower RPM, lowering the noise and the VRMs will thank you.
Edited by tpi2007 - 4/2/12 at 11:17am
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 34
I got my Q6600 to 3GHz with a little extra voltage for Prime95 stable on a G41 chipset.
Runs a 570 fine with not noticeable bottleneck thumb.gif
The Sig Rig
(19 items)
 
Wifey Rig
(11 items)
 
Xbox PC
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500k @ 4.8GHz stable ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 MSI GTX 980 Ti 32GB (4 x 8GB) 1866Mhz Ripjaws X 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
256GB Crucial M4 1.5 TB HDD XSPC Raystorm RS360 Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer 28" 4K Corsair AX750 Corsair 800D SWTOR Razer Naga 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium XSPC RS120 8 x GT AP-15s White Sleeved Cables for Corsair AX750 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3Ghz Asus P5G41T-M LX Plus EVGA GTX 680 2x4 GB 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
500GB WD Black 64 GB Crucial M4 Sony CD/DVD burner H40 w/ GT AP-15s 
OSPowerCase
Windows 7 Home 64 bit Corsair CX430 APEVIA X-Plorer2 Pink 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Pentium G620 Foxconn H67S ITX Intel HD 2000 2 x 4GB 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSPower
256GB Crucial M4 Old Laptop CD/DVD drive Windows 7 picoPSU-150-XT 
OtherOtherOther
4 x Purple LEDs Power button Tranquility Xbox 360 Skin 
  hide details  
Reply
The Sig Rig
(19 items)
 
Wifey Rig
(11 items)
 
Xbox PC
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500k @ 4.8GHz stable ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 MSI GTX 980 Ti 32GB (4 x 8GB) 1866Mhz Ripjaws X 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
256GB Crucial M4 1.5 TB HDD XSPC Raystorm RS360 Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer 28" 4K Corsair AX750 Corsair 800D SWTOR Razer Naga 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium XSPC RS120 8 x GT AP-15s White Sleeved Cables for Corsair AX750 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3Ghz Asus P5G41T-M LX Plus EVGA GTX 680 2x4 GB 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
500GB WD Black 64 GB Crucial M4 Sony CD/DVD burner H40 w/ GT AP-15s 
OSPowerCase
Windows 7 Home 64 bit Corsair CX430 APEVIA X-Plorer2 Pink 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Pentium G620 Foxconn H67S ITX Intel HD 2000 2 x 4GB 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSPower
256GB Crucial M4 Old Laptop CD/DVD drive Windows 7 picoPSU-150-XT 
OtherOtherOther
4 x Purple LEDs Power button Tranquility Xbox 360 Skin 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 34
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post

It's too risky. I'd say the Q9400 is the best bet.
Clock for clock at the same FSB the 45nm chips win most of the benchmarks.
See here the Core 2 Extreme X6800 vs the Core 2 Duo E7500, both run at 2.93 Ghz with a 1066 FSB. I can't find any benchmarks that compare 65nm 2 x 4 MB L2 cache vs 45nm 2 x 3 MB of L2 cache Core 2 Quads at the same clocks, but this is a good indication.
And then you have to factor in the RAM speeds. Ideally you should leave it at stock, so a 3.2 Ghz clockspeed for the Q9400 with a 1600 Mhz FSB and the RAM in sync would be the best bet, or the Q6600 at either 3.2 Ghz (8 x 400) or 3.4 Ghz (8.5 x 400). I doubt you can get to 3.6 Ghz with a voltage that won't blow up your motherboard or throttle the CPU, so 3.2 or 3.4 Ghz are the best options. At 3.2 the Q6600 would lose most of the benchmarks against the Q9400 at 3.2 Ghz, so that would leave the 3.4 Ghz mark, but can you get it stable with voltage that won't kill the motherboard or throttling that won't lower its performance, and performance wise will it be any faster ? Perhaps a little, but with a 200 Mhz clockspeed difference I doubt there would be much difference that would warrant you take all those risks. The Q9400 runs cooler, uses less power, the fans can spin at a lower RPM, lowering the noise and the VRMs will thank you.
took my e7500 to 3.6 stock voltages
post #24 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post

It's too risky. I'd say the Q9400 is the best bet.
Clock for clock at the same FSB the 45nm chips win most of the benchmarks.
See here the Core 2 Extreme X6800 vs the Core 2 Duo E7500, both run at 2.93 Ghz with a 1066 FSB. I can't find any benchmarks that compare 65nm 2 x 4 MB L2 cache vs 45nm 2 x 3 MB of L2 cache Core 2 Quads at the same clocks, but this is a good indication.
And then you have to factor in the RAM speeds. Ideally you should leave it at stock, so a 3.2 Ghz clockspeed for the Q9400 with a 1600 Mhz FSB and the RAM in sync would be the best bet, or the Q6600 at either 3.2 Ghz (8 x 400) or 3.4 Ghz (8.5 x 400). I doubt you can get to 3.6 Ghz with a voltage that won't blow up your motherboard or throttle the CPU, so 3.2 or 3.4 Ghz are the best options. At 3.2 the Q6600 would lose most of the benchmarks against the Q9400 at 3.2 Ghz, so that would leave the 3.4 Ghz mark, but can you get it stable with voltage that won't kill the motherboard or throttling that won't lower its performance, and performance wise will it be any faster ? Perhaps a little, but with a 200 Mhz clockspeed difference I doubt there would be much difference that would warrant you take all those risks. The Q9400 runs cooler, uses less power, the fans can spin at a lower RPM, lowering the noise and the VRMs will thank you.

Nope!

The Q6600 will outrun the Q9400 at the same clock. It has more cache (8MB vs 6MB) and that's all there is to it. Q9550 etc is faster clock for clock because it has 12MB, but the cheaper 45nm chips are not 'cuase they are cache crippled. Same with the Q8xxx series, the Q6600 will consistently make a little more FPS at the same speeds. I've tested them myself.

Q6600 FTW, definitely if you're only pushing 3.2 you'll want the Q6600.
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2thAche View Post

Nope!
The Q6600 will outrun the Q9400 at the same clock. It has more cache (8MB vs 6MB) and that's all there is to it. Q9550 etc is faster clock for clock because it has 12MB, but the cheaper 45nm chips are not 'cuase they are cache crippled. Same with the Q8xxx series, the Q6600 will consistently make a little more FPS at the same speeds. I've tested them myself.
Q6600 FTW, definitely if you're only pushing 3.2 you'll want the Q6600.

What are you talking about ? Do you have any proof ? I searched the best I could and didn't find benchmarks online that compared the Q6600 to the Q9400 so I linked to that comparison that compares essentially two dual cores with the same configuration. The E7500 has half the cache of the E8xxx series, I know what I linked to, and as you can see the E7500 wins most of the benchmarks when compared to the X6800, so no, that is not all there is to it.

So, are you telling me that just because we are talking about quad cores, the results are somehow reversed and now the Q6600 wins most of the times at the same clocks ? Show me proof. All I have indicates otherwise. Or are you just talking about games ? And what games have you tested ?
Edited by tpi2007 - 4/4/12 at 6:02pm
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
post #26 of 34
Well, I've built and overclocked about every version of the Core 2 series, 65 and 45nm, from the E6600 to the Q9550, all at high 24/7 clocks. And honestly why would I care to put misinformation on here? I have better things to do.

A year or so ago I had a 3.6GHz Q8300 and a 3.6GHz Q6600 literally side by side to compare. Even with the FSB advantage, the Q6600 edged out the Q8300. I'm not talking about major devastation, just small margins.

Lets say I'm wrong, and the Q9400 performs a little better than a same-clock Q8xxx. That little bit will be meaningless when it comes to apps and games. The bottom line is, the Q6600 is the easier OC and there won't be any meaningful difference in performance.

I don't know what you're so twisted about in the first place, look at the Core2 stuff I still have running in my rig list.

PS: Why are you running a Q9550 at only 3.4GHz on the best C2Q mobo series ever made? My 3.6 Q6600 will out-run that.
Edited by 2thAche - 4/4/12 at 7:35pm
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 34
Here, I think we all agree that 3dm06 is pretty CPU/RAM limited. I dug up some comps with the same 216 core GTX260. The Q9550 has 100MHz advantage. Figure in the Q9400 as a Q9550 with half the cache and do the math.

700

700
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
post #28 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2thAche View Post

Well, I've built and overclocked about every version of the Core 2 series, 65 and 45nm, from the E6600 to the Q9550, all at high 24/7 clocks. And honestly why would I care to put misinformation on here? I have better things to do.
A year or so ago I had a 3.6GHz Q8300 and a 3.6GHz Q6600 literally side by side to compare. Even with the FSB advantage, the Q6600 edged out the Q8300. I'm not talking about major devastation, just small margins.
Lets say I'm wrong, and the Q9400 performs a little better than a same-clock Q8xxx. That little bit will be meaningless when it comes to apps and games. The bottom line is, the Q6600 is the easier OC and there won't be any meaningful difference in performance.
I don't know what you're so twisted about in the first place, look at the Core2 stuff I still have running in my rig list.
PS: Why are you running a Q9550 at only 3.4GHz on the best C2Q mobo series ever made? My 3.6 Q6600 will out-run that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2thAche View Post

Here, I think we all agree that 3dm06 is pretty CPU/RAM limited. I dug up some comps with the same 216 core GTX260. The Q9550 has 100MHz advantage. Figure in the Q9400 as a Q9550 with half the cache and do the math.
700
700

I didn't say you were spreading misinformation, I asked for you to substantiate your claims with proof, because I supplied proof of what I was saying and people in this forum expect more than someone claiming something, they want the best information they can get.

Regarding your comparisons, you still don't make a direct comparison. A Q8300 has 2 MB less cache than a Q9400, so it's not the same. The Q9400 will perform better, you don't have to guess that. So, the small margins you claim for the Q8300 vs the Q6600 would be even smaller, and the Q9400 would probably win most benchmarks.

I'm not twisted about anything (you, on the other hand seem quite twisted, even bringing my rig into question), I just don't like when people write things like "Nope!" in bold letters without providing evidence of what they claim.

My point still stands, he has a G31 chipset based motherboard with 3 VRMs, it is too risky for the meaningless performance improvement, if any, the Q6600 will bring him.

As to my Q9550, in case you didn't notice, I have it running on an EP45-UD3LR - this is not the EP45-UD3P, it only has 4 VRMs and they don't have a heatsink. I'm running it at stock voltage, in sync with the RAM, which is at its stock 800 Mhz. Besides, I'm using all the slots, so 2 DIMMS per channel, and using two different brands of RAM, and it's all working perfectly. Why should I overclock it for minimal performance gains and a potential headache in the meantime adjusting settings and eventually having to buy heatsinks for the VRMs ?

Also, are you sure your 3.6 Ghz Q6600 will outrun it ? Post some benches and then we'll talk. My bet is that it will perform about the same as yours at 3.6 Ghz.

Anyway, I have an Asus Sabertooth X79, a 16 GB kit (4 x 4 GB) of Corsair Dominator DDR3 1866 Mhz RAM and a Core i7 3820 on my desk, I will be upgrading my rig in a few hours, I'm just doing a few benchmarks to compare the before and after.
Edited by tpi2007 - 4/4/12 at 9:44pm
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
post #29 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post

I didn't say you were spreading misinformation, I asked for you to substantiate your claims with proof, because I supplied proof of what I was saying and people in this forum expect more than someone claiming something, they want the best information they can get.
Regarding your comparisons, you still don't make a direct comparison. A Q8300 has 2 MB less cache than a Q9400, so it's not the same. The Q9400 will perform better, you don't have to guess that. So, the small margins you claim for the Q8300 vs the Q6600 would be even smaller, and the Q9400 would probably win most benchmarks.
I'm not twisted about anything (you, on the other hand seem quite twisted, even bringing my rig into question), I just don't like when people write things like "Nope!" in bold letters without providing evidence of what they claim.
My point still stands, he has a G31 chipset based motherboard with 3 VRMs, it is too risky for the meaningless performance improvement, if any, the Q6600 will bring him.
As to my Q9550, in case you didn't notice, I have it running on an EP45-UD3LR - this is not the EP45-UD3P, it only has 4 VRMs and they don't have a heatsink. I'm running it at stock voltage, in sync with the RAM, which is at its stock 800 Mhz. Besides, I'm using all the slots, so 2 DIMMS per channel, and using two different brands of RAM, and it's all working perfectly. Why should I overclock it for minimal performance gains and a potential headache in the meantime adjusting settings and eventually having to buy heatsinks for the VRMs ?
Also, are you sure your 3.6 Ghz Q6600 will outrun it ? Post some benches and then we'll talk. My bet is that it will perform about the same as yours at 3.6 Ghz.
Anyway, I have an Asus Sabertooth X79, a 16 GB kit (4 x 4 GB) of Corsair Dominator DDR3 1866 Mhz RAM and a Core i7 3820 on my desk, I will be upgrading my rig in a few hours, I'm just doing a few benchmarks to compare the before and after.

Ahh well, too bad you never used your Q9550 to its potential. For someone full of so much information you don't have much to show for it.

The stock 2500K in my HTPC runs about even with my 4.3GHz Q9550, I'm not wasting my time doing benchmarks on old hardware for a pissing match with you. 200MHz deficit, I wouldn't be worried. Everyone underestimates the Q6600. But what do I know, I only have 6 Core 2 systems right now.
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
More Cores
(20 items)
 
 
SFF: HADRON
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3930K @ 4.8Ghz offset ASrock X79 Extreme6/GB EVGA GTX680 FTW with EK waterblock EVGA GTX650 for PhysX 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G-Skill 4x4GB DDR3 1866 8-9-9-24@1.5V Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Agility 3 240GB x2 RAID 0 WD 500GB X2 RAID 0 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Raystorm XSPC Dual Bay reservoir with Alphacool variable... Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper Triple 120mm... EK GTX680 FTW waterblock 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64 bit Ultimate HP tSS-25X11LED 25" 1080p PC Power&Cooling Silentpower 910W Xigmatek Elysium 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder 3500 Rocketfish Creative Sound Core3D Logitech Z5300 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
960T unlocked to X6 ASUS M4A79XTD Evo Sapphire HD6870 1GB 2x2GB Ripjaws 7-8-7-24 F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB WD 320GB HDD Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H100 
OSPowerCase
Win 7 x64 Ultimate OCZ Stealthstream 600W HAF XB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570K P8Z77-I MSI 560 Ti TF2 Samsung 20nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M500 Kuhler 620 Windows 7 x64 52" Samsung LED TV 
CaseAudio
EVGA Hadron Air Denon receiver/ Polk audio 
  hide details  
Reply
post #30 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2thAche View Post

Ahh well, too bad you never used your Q9550 to its potential. For someone full of so much information you don't have much to show for it.
The stock 2500K in my HTPC runs about even with my 4.3GHz Q9550, I'm not wasting my time doing benchmarks on old hardware for a pissing match with you. 200MHz deficit, I wouldn't be worried. Everyone underestimates the Q6600. But what do I know, I only have 6 Core 2 systems right now.

You're a confrontational person aren't you ? You think you know better than others and that your word alone and writing things like "Nope!" in bold is better than anyone else's reasonings and facts.


What business do you have if I used it to its full potential or not ? Do you have any experience overclocking a Q9550 on an EP45-UD3LR with all the DIMM slots being used ? Do you ? Your Q9550 validation was made on an EP45-UD3P with one DIMM per channel. Don't talk about what you don't know. And what does that have to do with the fact that I have "so much information", that you failed to counter-argument ?

Knowing stuff and presenting information, which you failed to counter-argument, does not mean you have to use it just because someone else like you feels like I should push the chip higher.

Your whole argument revolved around the fact that a Q8300 "only" has 2 MB L2 less cache than the Q9400, so to you, the difference is small, yet you make it seem like my argument that the Q9400 that "only" has 2 MB L2 cache less than a Q6600 is not equally valid.

You can't have a double standard when arguing and the fact is you didn't provide ANY benchmarks of a Core 2 Quad Q9300, Q9400 or Q9500 or Q9505 against a Q6600, you provided guesses all the way.

Quote:
A year or so ago I had a 3.6GHz Q8300 and a 3.6GHz Q6600 literally side by side to compare. Even with the FSB advantage, the Q6600 edged out the Q8300. I'm not talking about major devastation, just small margins.

Lets say I'm wrong, and the Q9400 performs a little better than a same-clock Q8xxx. That little bit will be meaningless when it comes to apps and games. The bottom line is, the Q6600 is the easier OC and there won't be any meaningful difference in performance.
Quote:
The Q9550 has 100MHz advantage. Figure in the Q9400 as a Q9550 with half the cache and do the math.


This is all guesses. And if the margins are so small anyway, why are you advising a person with a G31 chipset motherboard with 3 VRMs without heatsink to go for the most power hungry chip ? That is BAD advice! Should I remind you of what you said earlier ?:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2thAche View Post

Limiting factor on the Q9400 will be FSB.
Limiting factor on the Q6600 will be power delivery.
I killed a G31 board with my Q6600, ran OCCT at 3.6/1.5V and about 30 minutes in the board died (with smoke).
I'd say the Q6600 is stil the best bet at whatever the highest OC OP can do with 1.4V and alot of air.

As to presenting benchmarks, you were the one bringing it up. I think my Q9550 at 3.4 Ghz performs about the same as your Q6600 at 3.6 Ghz, but I'm not stating it as a fact. You, on the other hand, say yours "will out-run that". I say you're probably wrong. If you want to know, I offered a way to settle it. Apparently you're too busy to compare facts and like making guesses instead. The difference between us is that you say things without substantiating them.

It really doesn't matter how many Core 2 systems you have running, it's the quality and accuracy of your advice that counts here. I have 5 Core 2 systems running, so what ?

You made a valid comment about the Q9400 being limited by FSB, but he should be able to get 1600 FSB, it's stated in the specs as O.C., so there is some degree of feasability in that, now getting a Q6600 any higher than 3.2 Ghz, at which point the performance difference shouldn't matter, requires power that the motherboard might not be able to handle. You admitted it yourself. Why take the risk when the performance difference is so small ?
Edited by tpi2007 - 4/5/12 at 4:51pm
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel - General
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel - General › Q9400 VS Q6600