OT - Q9450 processor

Jeff9329 wrote on 5/30/2008, 7:54 AM
Im looking at making the quarterly PC upgrades and was wondering if anyone has recently upgraded from a Q6600 to the Q9450 processor?

A search showed one Q9450 result in the rendertest thread (1:39 min).

Im wondering if anyone who has made the upgrade thought it was a worthwhile upgrade, i.e. made rendering noticeably faster.

Thanks.

Comments

Coursedesign wrote on 5/30/2008, 8:23 AM
It would be more worthwhile if you could find any, see recent posts.
UlfLaursen wrote on 5/30/2008, 8:43 AM
I have not a clue, but I would think it not give very much to go from 2.4 to 2.6 GHz. You will get 1 MB more cache pr. core, but I'm not sure it will give you much.
Maybe you will get more if you go for a 3.0 GHz, but over here at least it is very expensive compared to what you get.

/Ulf
Stringer wrote on 5/30/2008, 8:46 AM
I have a 9450 that I am going to try in one of my PC's .. ( hopefully over the week end )
I can make a comparison to my Q6600 and let you know, if you don't come up with an answer before then ..

Here is a review that focuses more on gaming, but it does have some scores from a benchmark called CINEBENCH , which includes some rendering tests ..

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_q9450/7.htm

It appears the 9450 scored ~ 8 -19% higher than the Q6600 running CINEBENCH ..

CINEBENCH is downloadable here :
http://www.maxon.net/pages/download/cinebench_e.html
Coursedesign wrote on 5/30/2008, 9:39 AM
Q9450 can be found on eBay currently.

It seems to be more picky about the motherboard than the Q6600.

If you already have a working Q6600 system, don't bother with this, wait for the next generation expected this fall.
apit34356 wrote on 5/30/2008, 1:52 PM
"If you already have a working Q6600 system, don't bother with this," I agree with analysis. Of course, if your production is cost/time is being hammered, building a second or nth machine for future growth maybe the better solution,----which there any to! ;-) 6-8 cores cost are getting move affortable this fall, but the software should be improving, making the real different.
craftech wrote on 6/1/2008, 1:30 PM
The Q9450 is not a direct drop in replacement for the Q6600. The Q9450 is a 45nm processor with a Front Side Bus of 1333MHz.
The Q6600 is a 65nm processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066 MHz.
The voltage requirements are very different between Kentsfield and Yorkfield. The Yorkfield is designed to operate at lower voltages thereby producing less heat at higher clock rates compared to Kentsfield. The problem is with the motherboards and their chipsets and voltage regulators. They need to be designed to handle the different requirements I mentioned.

Go the the motherboard manufacturer's website and look up your motherboard, then look at the list of processors it can handle. The Q9450 may in fact not be listed. And a firmware update (for most motherboards I am aware of) cannot possible make the motherboard handle the required changes because they are hardware changes.

John
Coursedesign wrote on 6/1/2008, 2:14 PM
No problem, lots of choices for mobos that will run either.

eVGA 780i, Gigabyte ga-p35-ds3p, ...

Today's mobos are very adaptable.

craftech wrote on 6/1/2008, 5:01 PM
No problem, lots of choices for mobos that will run either.

eVGA 780i, Gigabyte ga-p35-ds3p, ...

Today's mobos are very adaptable.
=========
Doesn't mean Jeff's motherboard is one of them Bjorn. I still think Jeff would be wise to check the motherboard manufacturer's website to see if it will run a Yorkfield processor before buying it. Lot's of us videographers including John Cline and myself own Intel D975XBX2 motherboards because they are nearly bulletproof and work really well for these applications. Popular as those Intel boards are, they are not able to run a Yorkfield without a hardware modification to the voltage regulator and two fingers crossed behind your back.

John
Coursedesign wrote on 6/1/2008, 5:45 PM
Of course.

I did say it was more picky about the motherboard than a Q6600, but you're right. There are a lot of people who think that as long as it's the same socket, it MUST be compatible.
Jeff9329 wrote on 6/2/2008, 8:40 AM
My mother board is good up to the Core 2 Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz,1333FSB,L2:12MB,rev.C1,4 cores) since the February bios release and rev C0 processor since 2007.

The rev C0 processors are almost the same as the Q6600 (both revs) and most MBs will run them with no problem.

You are most likely talking about compatability problems with the Next Gen 140 watt processors, not the 95 watt processors above.

News article:
FREMONT, CA (May 27, 2008) - ASUS®, worldwide leader in component and notebook design and manufacturing, today announced a wide range of high-performance motherboards that support the highly-anticipated 140W Powered CPUs. These CPUs are equipped with extremely fast CPU core frequencies, and will provide awesome performance gains for thread-intensive games and applications. Backed by a solid power design, systems built around these CPUs will also experience extraordinarily stable operations. ASUS is the first motherboard manufacturer to offer complete product lines supporting the new 140W powered CPUs – offering users the most flexible choice of motherboards.

140W CPU Ready Motherboards
The following chart shows the ASUS motherboards that are currently 140W CPU-ready. With top-notch R&D, ASUS constantly stays in step with the latest developments and technologies to provide users with hardware and firmware for optimal performance and functionality. The following list is not exhaustive, and more 140W CPU Ready ASUS motherboards are expected to be announced soon.