Overclock.net banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,313 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Quote:


Conclusion

Intel has introduced low-power, 45 nm quad core processors for the desktop market. Although AMD was first to release such a product, the Intel processors are exactly as fast as the regular 95 W versions.

The only real difference besides the power consumption level is their pricing, which is higher as a result of the lower energy use. While the Q8200 costs $163, the Q8200S has a $245 price tag. The price difference between the Core 2 Quad Q9400 and the Q9400S is $101. The Q9550S top model is only $52 more expensive than the regular version.

We believe this is a lot, as Intel has been offering low power 65 W Xeon quad-cores for a while now, and hence does have some experience with these parts. On the other hand, their new S-series models represent a unique selling proposition. After all, AMD currently does not offer quad-core processors at upper mainstream clock speeds and mainstream power envelopes.

The 8200S may not make a lot of sense when compared to a regular Core 2 Duo E8500 or E8600, but the Q9400S and Q9550S deliver significant performance within the mainstream 65 W TDP specification. Here’s hoping that AMD will be able to offer a low-power Phenom II soon as well.

SOURCE

I know someone's posted a review of the Q8200s, but I don't think the Q9550s has been reviewed yet.

Too bad there's no overclocked benchmarks, oh well.
 

·
Efficiencycionado
Joined
·
5,587 Posts
ok so why did they not use the original q8200 and q9550 for comparisons with consumption?

i was thinking of buying a q8200 for general computing and htpc for the living room till this came out. it sure is tempting to have the most efficient quad. but $100 more for the exact performance? come on. is the consumption difference that big enough to justify the cost?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,985 Posts
yeah it should be like $30 more, this is ridiculous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,401 Posts
the price difference isn't going to appeal at all... especially for same preformance and not that the power consumption is gona matter that much in the long run.

for a Q8200S I could buy a nice new Q9550 =0
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,985 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by xwinx View Post
the price difference isn't going to appeal at all... especially for same preformance and not that the power consumption is gona matter that much in the long run.

for a Q8200S I could buy a nice new Q9550 =0
yeah so true. It is just dumb. the 30w savings will probably amount to under $10 a year too. 30w is nothing.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top