• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Q9400 vs E8x00

V

vict0r

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
1,027
Let's take the E8200..

Q9400 vs E8200 ... both are 6 MB L2 Cache and both are 2.66 Ghz ..

one is 4 cores, the other is 2 cores..

isn't the Q9400 supposed to beat the E8200?

Lets OC the Q9400 to 3Ghz ..and leave an E8400 @ stock..

ain't the Q9400 still supposed to be faster @ 3 Ghz than an E8400 @ 3 Ghz?

What do you think?
Did I make any sense or does this sound like a big pile of bullsh*t for you?
 
The E8x00 would be faster in single threads clock for clock because the Q9400 doesn't have fully shared 6MB L2 Cache. It's more like 2x3MB L2 Cache which means a single core on the Q9400 can only use up to 3MB of cache.
 
It'd be faster if you could take advantage of the two extra cores, which don't usually get used. If both have 6MBs of cache, then technically the E8200 has the better cache per core ratio. Both are good choices, but personally I'd get the dual core E8200. Quads just don't bring many benefits in terms of gaming.
 
btw, i didnt ask this because im interested in a q9400 or something.. i asked because i was just wondering..
 
Realistically, at the same clock speeds, on normal apps, you won't see a difference between the two. The cache differences are small, and most apps don't make use of the extra cores.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top