Q9450 folding preliminary results

Xilikon

[H]ard|DCer of the Year 2008
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
14,845
As promised, here is some results of folding with a Q9450 at 3520 MHz (8x440) :


Project 2605, average of 2495 PPD per VM.

Code:
[22:10:34] Writing local files
[22:10:34] Completed 95000 out of 500000 steps  (19 percent)
[22:21:24] Writing local files
[22:21:24] Completed 100000 out of 500000 steps  (20 percent)
[22:32:12] Writing local files
[22:32:12] Completed 105000 out of 500000 steps  (21 percent)
[22:43:12] Writing local files
[22:43:12] Completed 110000 out of 500000 steps  (22 percent)
[22:54:07] Writing local files
[22:54:07] Completed 115000 out of 500000 steps  (23 percent)
[23:04:51] Writing local files
[23:04:51] Completed 120000 out of 500000 steps  (24 percent)
[23:15:24] Writing local files
[23:15:24] Completed 125000 out of 500000 steps  (25 percent)
[23:25:56] Writing local files
[23:25:56] Completed 130000 out of 500000 steps  (26 percent)

With a Q6600 at 3600 MHz (9x400), project 2605, average of 2390 PPD :

Code:
[10:01:26] Completed 90000 out of 500000 steps  (18 percent)
[10:12:08] Writing local files
[10:12:08] Completed 95000 out of 500000 steps  (19 percent)
[10:22:52] Writing local files
[10:22:52] Completed 100000 out of 500000 steps  (20 percent)
[10:33:36] Writing local files
[10:33:36] Completed 105000 out of 500000 steps  (21 percent)
[10:44:20] Writing local files
[10:44:20] Completed 110000 out of 500000 steps  (22 percent)
[10:55:05] Writing local files
[10:55:05] Completed 115000 out of 500000 steps  (23 percent)
[11:05:47] Writing local files
[11:05:47] Completed 120000 out of 500000 steps  (24 percent)
[11:16:28] Writing local files
[11:16:28] Completed 125000 out of 500000 steps  (25 percent)
[11:27:11] Writing local files
[11:27:11] Completed 130000 out of 500000 steps  (26 percent)

So far, there is a slight bump of 100 PPD running with a Q9450 but this can also be caused by the extra bandwidth of memory (it's running at 1056 MHz 5-5-5-12). I'm sorry I didn't test with 8x400 for both since in my haste, I swapped the processors too fast but this test result show very little improvement beside running much cooler.

With this in mind, if you want something new to play with, a Q9450 is a nice toy but for a pure folding box, nothing beat a Q6600 for 200$. This is why the rest of my farm will be Q6600 only.

 

HighYield

Gawd
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
933
Do you know what the difference in actual power consumption is between the two processors? You're saying there isn't much performance difference...would the Q9450 be cheaper to run over the course of a year or two running 24/7?

 

Kendrak

[H]ard|DCer of the Year 2009
Joined
Aug 29, 2001
Messages
21,142
Do you know what the difference in actual power consumption is between the two processors? You're saying there isn't much performance difference...would the Q9450 be cheaper to run over the course of a year or two running 24/7?


Some how I truly doubt it

 

metallicafan

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2010
Joined
Mar 30, 2005
Messages
2,204
Thanks for the results. Im not sure how much these different work units vary but is there a possibility that there may be more of a difference in a different blend of WU? Just wondering. . .
 

HighYield

Gawd
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
933
Thanks for the info. I thought there might have been a little more of an advantage to the Q9450 but your results show that not to be the case.

 
Joined
Apr 3, 2008
Messages
43
With the temps and voltage lower on your Q9450, do you think you have some more headroom to work with in terms of achieving a higher overclock?

Also, what are your folding temps for both the Q6600 and Q9450?--my Q6600 temps are at 62C, and I'm wondering if that's to be expected. Thanks.
 

RPhArrow

Gawd
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
939
Any experiences with FAH and the Q9300 yet ? It's 70 bucks cheaper & I'm not sure the extra cache of the 9450 will produce a proportional amount of extra points.
 

BillR

Born Again Cynic
Joined
Feb 17, 2002
Messages
18,540
With the temps and voltage lower on your Q9450, do you think you have some more headroom to work with in terms of achieving a higher overclock?

Also, what are your folding temps for both the Q6600 and Q9450?--my Q6600 temps are at 62C, and I'm wondering if that's to be expected. Thanks.

62 is a bit high for my tastes on a box running 24/7/365. You are defiantly not in the probably going to blow it up tomorrow area but with a TRUE or it’s little brother the Ultima-90 along with proper application of AS-5 you should be able to get into the mid to low 50s. Those temps also assume a well ventilated case with a few 120mm fans to move the air.

Just so we are talking about equal things all my Quads are G0 stepping and I won’t run them over 1.4 VCORE after droop.

Hope that helps a bit:)


 

capreppy

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - April 2009
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
3,410
Thanks Xilikon!!

This confirms a lot of what others are saying. The best bang for the buck still looks to be the Q6600.

 

owkia

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,331
Any experiences with FAH and the Q9300 yet ? It's 70 bucks cheaper & I'm not sure the extra cache of the 9450 will produce a proportional amount of extra points.

The Q9350 has a 7.5x multiplier though which can be a pretty big downfall for overclocking. Even the 8x multiplier of the Q9450 can be somewhat limiting compared to the 9x of the Q6600.
 

aldamon

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 24, 2000
Messages
6,600
With the temps and voltage lower on your Q9450, do you think you have some more headroom to work with in terms of achieving a higher overclock?

There's no headroom with an 8x multi.

Also, what are your folding temps for both the Q6600 and Q9450?--my Q6600 temps are at 62C, and I'm wondering if that's to be expected. Thanks.

That's fine for a quad. No worries.

The Q9350 has a 7.5x multiplier though which can be a pretty big downfall for overclocking. Even the 8x multiplier of the Q9450 can be somewhat limiting compared to the 9x of the Q6600.

Yeah, the Q9300/9350 are the E6300 all over again. You have to push your mobo over the edge to overclock them. Been there, done that.


 

Xilikon

[H]ard|DCer of the Year 2008
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
14,845
Thanks for the results. Im not sure how much these different work units vary but is there a possibility that there may be more of a difference in a different blend of WU? Just wondering. . .

I will report the results with a 2619 WU when I get it. I'm curious to see if the larger cache and higher memory bandwidth help a lot with this memory intensive WU.

With the temps and voltage lower on your Q9450, do you think you have some more headroom to work with in terms of achieving a higher overclock?

Also, what are your folding temps for both the Q6600 and Q9450?--my Q6600 temps are at 62C, and I'm wondering if that's to be expected. Thanks.


As for the temps, mine is hovering around 50C on the hottest core but that's with a high end watercooling setup (almost all chips is watercooled excepted the southbridge). It's with 1.45v but that's a rough and fast overclocking attempt and tonight, I will do more tweaking. With my Q6600, it's also 49-50C at full load with 1.475v (too lazy to check if I can get it stable at lower voltage).

Right now, I was unable to go over 8x445 due to a motherboard issue. I'm checking with other Q9450/X3350 owners with Maximus Formula to find what is the problem over on XS.

 

Imitation

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
2,536
I got my X3350 installed and running today during a slightly longer lunch than normal. Vista wasn't too awfully upset about me changing the cpu which was nice. I was worried i'd have to call MS and tell them what happened and get a reactivate code.

Anyway, only one instance of SMP going for now since that's what my dual core was running previously. Also no overclocking yet, but temps seemed really good, i was at about 40C running the SMP client, whereas my pentium dual core was at about 45C, course the pentium was at 1.45vcore. Oh well, tonight the real fun will begin!

 

jws2346

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 28, 2007
Messages
1,768
Man, am I glad someone posted a comparision of the, IMO, ATM, overpriced and over hyped Q9450 vs the Q6600 (don't anybody freak out, I'm talking strictly about a dedicated folding machine, 24/7 folder :rolleyes: )

Thanks Xilikon :D

I agree with the much more experienced folders, such as yourself, around the Web that nothing can beat a quad core Q6600 Kentsfield at the "bang for the buck" price for a dedicated folder. (3 thousand plus at stock ppd, some people I've heard > 4,000 ppd G0 stepping OC'ed and it's around $200 bucks until Apr 20th :eek: )

"Only the Shadow knows" and the man upstairs what the price for the Q6600 is going to be after April the 20th. :p

Thanks again Xilikon, you've really helped me out big time, ATM the Q6600 looks like the best deal for a folder and it may look like even a better deal after the Apr 20 price cuts . :cool:

Edit: I wasn't disrespecting anyone that owns the Xeon version I just think Q6600 and "desktop". (I know the Xeon is a 775 skt) :)

 

Xilikon

[H]ard|DCer of the Year 2008
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
14,845
Yeah, a Q6600 cannot be beat. I just spend a bit more just to have a toy to play with for my main PC. It's mainly for me to see if I can push 3.8 - 4.0 GHz 24/7 and get some extra benefits. For a dedicated folder, everyone agree a Q6600 is a excellent value in terms of power efficiency, PPD production and sheer awesomeness..

However, if the Q9450 price drop to 250$, it can become a serious contender and this will not happen before mid-summer at least. On the other hand, a Q9300 is seriously handicapped by the smaller cache and only 7.5 multiplier.

 

gnewbury

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - September 2007
Joined
May 4, 2001
Messages
2,544
Yeah, a Q6600 cannot be beat. I just spend a bit more just to have a toy to play with for my main PC. It's mainly for me to see if I can push 3.8 - 4.0 GHz 24/7 and get some extra benefits. For a dedicated folder, everyone agree a Q6600 is a excellent value in terms of power efficiency, PPD production and sheer awesomeness..

However, if the Q9450 price drop to 250$, it can become a serious contender and this will not happen before mid-summer at least. On the other hand, a Q9300 is seriously handicapped by the smaller cache and only 7.5 multiplier.


Frys.com just dropped the price to $180. EVEN sweeter.

 

Tigerbiten

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - February 2007/January 2
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Messages
5,028
The cpu's I want to get are the E5450's so I can swop out my X5355's.
With the savings due to a lower power draw, 80w vs 110 w, I could just sneak another Quad into the farm.
But they are still £500 per CPU and I want 4.

Luck .............. :D
 

Imitation

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
2,536
Yeah, a Q6600 cannot be beat. I just spend a bit more just to have a toy to play with for my main PC. It's mainly for me to see if I can push 3.8 - 4.0 GHz 24/7 and get some extra benefits. For a dedicated folder, everyone agree a Q6600 is a excellent value in terms of power efficiency, PPD production and sheer awesomeness..

However, if the Q9450 price drop to 250$, it can become a serious contender and this will not happen before mid-summer at least. On the other hand, a Q9300 is seriously handicapped by the smaller cache and only 7.5 multiplier.


Yeah i did pretty much the same thing. I could have bought a q6600 back in jan when i got the rest of my parts but i waited it out for the 45nm quads mostly for fun like xilikon said. Since the wife limits me to 1 "main" desktop, I wanted the latest, even if its not the greatest in terms of cost vs PPD.

And I agree the Q9300 is just worthless for the folder unless it comes cheaper than the q6600.
 
Top