q6600 or q9450?

[mit78]

i have q6600 and intend to buy q9450,which is better then two of them
i suppose q9450...
what is yours opinions?

 

[oscrogo]

Of course the q9450, but is it worth spending the $300+ to get a very little gain in performance and OC headroom? With your setup, I'd rather drop that money on another 280gtx

 

[HardwareGuru]

If you have the Q6600 already, I would not bother with a Q9450 already. The GTX280 is plenty for your 22" Samsung monitor. I would up my LCD monitor to a 24" already and game at 1920 x 1200 to take advantage of that GTX280.

 

[vanilla_guerilla]

not worth it now. you can get a retail q9450 for $279, but you can get a q6600 for about $100 less. and the q6600 will probably overclock higher. but watch the 9450 prices, as its being discontinued. the prices may go down rapidly.

 

[ZX7891]

9450 for now

 

[wrangler]

I sold my B3 Q6600 for $150. Found a Q9450 retail unopened for $270 on Anand. Net cost - $120. Couldn't be happier. OC's better. Runs cooler. Is slightly better clock for clock. Now, I didn't just do this to get a different chip. It was part of me running, not walking, running away from 680i and Nvidia chipsets FOREVER so I was taking the system apart and getting a new board anyway and thought......what the hell. Now, If I'd had a G0...........I don't know. I'd probably kept it for the higher multi. I bought my B3 during the whole B3/G0 conversation and I thought bah, can't be that big of deal but........it is. They are a different monster.

But if I was building a system from the ground up today I'd say for sure go for the 45nm part. More cache, better clock for clock.

So......my 2 cents.

 

[axan]

q9450 runs cooler and clocks higher

 

[baleedit]

q9450 runs cooler and clocks higher

Extreme failure! Q6600 G0 consistently clocks higher than the Q9450. I've seen many cases where the 6600 can hit 4.0Ghz on water, and very very few 9450's that can.

Clock for clock, as mentioned many times on review sites the 9450 is faster, yet the 6600, in most cases, will overclock higher in most cases.

Also, the 9450 will only run cooler if left at stock voltage, and it most definitely will not hit 3.6 at stock.

So if running stock and you wanna spend an extra Benjamin, get the 9450. If you want an almost guaranteed 3.6 on air, I'd still choose the 6600.

Then there's the SSE 4.1 to consider as well as other variables. But please don't say the 9450 overclocks better, lol.

 

[axan]

I have q6600 G0 and my q9450 clocks higher. the 6600 toped out at ~3.4 on air, and 9450 went 3.5 and now its running at 3.7 on water (not done ocing, still playing with it) I'm not talking about Setting WR here I'm talking stable 24x7 oc that will work without "magic" conditions

 

[vanilla_guerilla]

ive had a couple q6600, a q6700 and 2 q9450. on the same motherboard the 65nm parts always clocked higher. considering that they had higher multipliers, can take more voltage and more heat, this is abc type information. and while they do run a tad warmer than the 45nm parts, its not like its an alarming amount, or an amount that the 5 billion people who are using and overclocking them cant handle. and they do use more voltage, but its not like the difference between a 65nm part and a 45nm part will make or break you.

 

[wadec22]

ive had a couple q6600, a q6700 and 2 q9450. on the same motherboard the 65nm parts always clocked higher. considering that they had higher multipliers, can take more voltage and more heat, this is abc type information. and while they do run a tad warmer than the 45nm parts, its not like its an alarming amount, or an amount that the 5 billion people who are using and overclocking them cant handle. and they do use more voltage, but its not like the difference between a 65nm part and a 45nm part will make or break you.

QFT. I think people forget that the q9450 has 4mb more cache to add to the heat issue. The heat output difference should be minimal. While a q9450 has the potential to reach a slightly higher clock speed, most motherboards fsb limitations will keep that from happening.

 

[truffle00]

I was in the same boat and went with the Q6600 since mine overclocks pretty well. I figure I won't be able to get enough additional speed out of the Q9450 to justify the cost to my pocketbook.

Now, if you want a Q9450 I do have one for sale, new in box. And remember, it is OBO.

 

[AthlonXP]

Save your money for the new stuff to come out. That chip will do pretty much everything you need.

 

[mit78]

thx for support.but i bought q9450,work great,and more cool,than q6600.