what's the difference

[solidsteve]

well i was just looking at the Q9450 and Q9550 and the only difference i see between them is one is 0.1-0.2 ghz faster

is there any difference apart from that to justify paying nearly the same price again (£148 difference in price)

[wonderlust]

From this http://www.intel.com/products/processor/core2quad/specifications.htm

it looks like it is just speed difference,

Although the higher the Multiplier the less FSB you need to get those 4Ghz+ over clocks. From what I have read the Q9450 does not clock any better than the Q6600 due to the 1333 FSB (Q6600 is 1066)

[solidsteve]

From this http://www.intel.com/products/processor/core2quad/specifications.htm

it looks like it is just speed difference,

Although the higher the Multiplier the less FSB you need to get those 4Ghz+ over clocks. From what I have read the Q9450 does not clock any better than the Q6600 due to the 1333 FSB (Q6600 is 1066)

ok thanks

guess its just a higher speed and multi like the QX series

[coiler]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c400/pault123/penryn.jpg



taken from my post here, http://forums.aria.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3376

basically slightly faster GHz and an 8.5x multiplier. at an expected $214 more! i'd stick with the Q9450 for ultimate bang for buckness 8)

[solidsteve]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c400/pault123/penryn.jpg



taken from my post here, http://forums.aria.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3376

basically slightly faster GHz and an 8.5x multiplier. at an expected $214 more! i'd stick with the Q9450 for ultimate bang for buckness 8)

thanks i was just thinking the same thing, a 0.5 extra multiple is a bit well not worth the money to say the very least

[Mul.]

Definitely not worth the extra money. 8x vs 8.5x multi isn't worth any more than an extra £20-30 tops.

If you're yet to buy a quad at all and could potentially afford a Q9450, there's no harm in buying one. While it may only clock as well as a Q6600 due to a FSB wall that might arise quite early on, you've still got to bare in mind that the Q9450 will run a bit cooler has more L2 Cache and has a few little architectural enhancements that overall makes it faster clock for clock compared to the Q6600. At a Motherboard and RAM point of view anyway, it's not too hard to find a motherboard that can do upwards of 450FSB on a Quad and RAM upwards of DDR2-900.

[solidsteve]

yes i have a gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R and 4gb worth of ram sat here waiting for a quad to go with it

i was just looking at the speed, fsb and cache the only noticeable difference between the Q9450 and Q9550 is the clock speed and 8.5 multiple to a slower clock and a 8 multiple

so it all comes down to money the Q6600 or the newer Q9450, it will be a while before i get it (a month or 3) and how much i have at the time

[Mul.]

Right, so you've already got a motherboard and ram sitting about? I probably would've bought it all in one go as right now you've got bits of kit that are sitting at home depreciating and unused.
If you'll be waiting over a month to buy the CPU might it be an idea to get the most out of your new equipment by getting yourself a cheap Pentium E2xxx Dual Core and graphics card to tide you over?

[solidsteve]

Right, so you've already got a motherboard and ram sitting about? I probably would've bought it all in one go as right now you've got bits of kit that are sitting at home depreciating and unused.
If you'll be waiting over a month to buy the CPU might it be an idea to get the most out of your new equipment by getting yourself a cheap Pentium E2xxx Dual Core and graphics card to tide you over?

yeah that would be a good thought if i had the money to do it, the reason for me getting the parts like this is well i'm not that good at saving it

i know there no point in buying a part for it to sit there but if i don't get it i never will:sad: