Q9450 vs X3350

U

Ubtree

n00b
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
23
There are a number of threads mentioning using an X3350 in place of a Q9450. I had always thought that Xeons were more stable but also slower than mainstream processors. I had also thought that Xeons were much more expensive than mainstream processors, and required a different chipset (and I know that this is not the case for the X3350). I have looked at the brief specifications on the Intel web site, and can see no obvious differences between them - but surely there must be some difference(?).

I was intending to pair a Q9450 with an Abit IP35 Pro for a desktop/workstation, but I'm now wondering whether I should consider an X3350 instead. I'd be really grateful if someone could explain:
  • what compatibility issues might arise
  • what the differences in performance would be for a workstation used primarily for photo-editing, without any overclocking
Many thanks.
 
No difference in performance - at all.

There might be compatibility problems. Here is Abit's list, not sure if it is up to date. Buy it and give it a try!
 
Yeah. I've seen the Abit list, and there's no mention of either. But the blurb on the IP35 does refer to 45nm compatibility, and so I guess that they will be bringing out a BIOS that will be compatible. But I don't have an old (definitely compatible) LG775 processor, and so if I need to upgrade the BIOS to make it work with the new processor.... :(. But I think that I will give it a try, and if necessary buy the cheapest LG775 processor that I can find in order to be able to flash the BIOS.
 
as far as i can tell, if u are utterly impatient, u can go for the xeon and be fine.

im willing to wait a few more days, god willing, for the q9450. that way I am positive nothing related to compatibility, bios, or unseen issues down the line will hit me. also, i figure a more mainstream processor will get more attention from the community when it comes to tech help, oc comparisons, and perhaps more attention from the people bringing us drivers and whatnot
 
I dropped a X3350 into a Asus P5E3 Deluxe WiFi board today and it's running great. Quad Priming at 3.2ghz, 1.17v indicated. Even speed step works to drop it to 2.4ghz at idle. :)
 
abit ip35 pro latest revision here and quad 9450 did not boot with bios ver 14. needed to install beta 16, no word at this point on the official bios. had my 6400 still so i could boot in. even then, it's not properly recognized in the id ..it seems to work fine otherwise but shows as a "genuine intel cpu" with 4 cores on the boot page.
 
tenax said:
abit ip35 pro latest revision here and quad 9450 did not boot with bios ver 14. needed to install beta 16.
Click to expand...
Ah.... According to the Abit BIOS download page, V.14 is compatible with the Yorkfields, but from what you say this might be a little optimistic. I've got my X3350 on order, but it looks as though I shall have to buy a basic LGA775 as well. :( I'll post my experience sometime next week, hopefully.
 
Ubtree said:
Ah.... According to the Abit BIOS download page, V.14 is compatible with the Yorkfields, but from what you say this might be a little optimistic. I've got my X3350 on order, but it looks as though I shall have to buy a basic LGA775 as well. :( I'll post my experience sometime next week, hopefully.
Click to expand...
If your lucky, it might boot up as Unknown CPU and then you can flash it to the latest BIOS.
 
didn't work for me..14 is compatible with the wolfdales..but...i wouldn't kid ya:)
 
X3350 runs in my Asus P5K-Premium with the 0504 bios. What is interesting though is at boot I need to press F1 because it says I have an unknown CPU detected. Hit F1 and it boots fine and runs great at 3.6GHz with 1.27vcore. Priming away as I type this.
 
It isn't officially supported by desktop chipsets, which is why you'll find it hard to see it on writing by a manufactuer stating they support server class cpu's. Server chips are meant for server chipsets, desktop chips are for desktop chipsets.

Will it work? Probably yes, but don't be surprised if it doesn't.
 
I have used no less than 10 Xeon socket 775 CPUs in the last 2 years and I have NEVER had a problem running them on a desktop motherboard. I am sure that by the next bios release from Asus the little bug at start up will disappear. But right now it is rocking on this board. Did a couple of quick tests of shrinking some video files and compressing some other large files using winRAR and this thing screams.

I wish I saved all of my screenies over the years...but I have run Xeons for the last 2 years right along with their desktop counterparts. I used to have screenies from 2 CPUs, 1-Xeon 3060 and 1-desktop E6600 with the same L629B batch code. Both CPUs would OC to 3.71GHz with 1.4vcore. There was absolutely NO difference in benching performance. There was NO difference in UT2004 gaming performance. There was NO difference in video editing performace. I can not speak for other apps but for those 3 I can. I do not believe there is any difference between these CPUs other than perhaps some micro code that identifies them as xeon vs a desktop.
 
Q9450 trays are available, if you don't mind the poor warranty. I went with one from TankGuys this morning, and as I'm overclocking I'll be voiding that warranty anyway.

The long/short of it is that it will most likely work, but it doesn't hurt to contact your motherboard manufacturer to ask for assurance.
 
any word or links on 780i supporting these bad boys?

I have to wait... receiving mine tomorrow, but won't be able to test until Friday.
 
Bought a X3350 OEM, paired it with a stock Maximus Formula (bios 907 I think), POST'ed perfectly. FYI guys, and anyone searching for info, although it makes it to POST and beyond, it will prompt you to "update the bios to unleash it's full power". Refer here: Image (credit to hyperlight at ncix forums) I knew this already and had the MF1004 bios ready on a USB flashdrive; after the flash it worked perfectly and I no longer get the prompt. I'm running everything stock at the moment.

Specs for anyone who cares:

X3350,Zerotherm Nirvana HSF, eVGA 8800GT, Corsair 620HX PSU, Corsair 2x2GB 4/4/4/12
 
sofarfrome said:
X3350 runs in my Asus P5K-Premium with the 0504 bios. What is interesting though is at boot I need to press F1 because it says I have an unknown CPU detected. Hit F1 and it boots fine and runs great at 3.6GHz with 1.27vcore. Priming away as I type this.
Click to expand...

I popped in a rev C1 Q9450 into a P5K-Premium with the 504 BIOS and I'm getting the same message. My temps are a bit high but I am able to boot into Vista ok. What I notice from the ASUS website is that 504 supports the Q9450/rev C0, but I have the C1. Wondering if this could be the reason for that message.
 
Skeez187 said:
Bought a X3350 OEM, paired it with a stock Maximus Formula (bios 907 I think), POST'ed perfectly. FYI guys, and anyone searching for info, although it makes it to POST and beyond, it will prompt you to "update the bios to unleash it's full power". Refer here: Image (credit to hyperlight at ncix forums) I knew this already and had the MF1004 bios ready on a USB flashdrive; after the flash it worked perfectly and I no longer get the prompt. I'm running everything stock at the moment.

Specs for anyone who cares:

X3350,Zerotherm Nirvana HSF, eVGA 8800GT, Corsair 620HX PSU, Corsair 2x2GB 4/4/4/12
Click to expand...
Great to know - now how does it run at 400 FSB? :)
 
C0 vs C1...I never thought of that but I suppose it is possible as my E3110 (C0 stepping) runs fine but my X3350 (C1 stepping) give that message.
 
If anyone else is still wondering about board compatibility. I just successfully installed my X3350 on a Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS4 with the F2 BIOS. It works perfectly - no issues at all. It really is the same chip as the Q9450, right down to the processor errata.

I did send an email to Gigabyte asking about this cpu. Here was their response:
Answer : Unfortunately it cannot support the Xenon 3350 processor​

yeah.. whatever.
 
doublea2020 said:
If anyone else is still wondering about board compatibility. I just successfully installed my X3350 on a Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS4 with the F2 BIOS. It works perfectly - no issues at all. It really is the same chip as the Q9450, right down to the processor errata.

I did send an email to Gigabyte asking about this cpu. Here was their response:
Answer : Unfortunately it cannot support the Xenon 3350 processor​

yeah.. whatever.
Click to expand...

as long as they stepping C1 is supported , im possitive it will work. i dont know why Gigabyte gave that answer because the GA-EX38-DS4 supports C1 stepping since F3 bios.
 
Good news . . . and bad news.

I received the X3350 today (it had taken a week to clear Customs), and it booted without any problem in the IP35 Pro with its the pre-installed BIOS. I next successfully updated to 1.6 beta 10, and it re-booted again perfectly.

The BIOS reported the processor as follows:
Main processor: Intel(R) XEON(R) 2.72GHz(340X8.0, 4CPUs)
CPU Brand Name: Intel(R) XEON(R) CPU X3350 @ 2.66GHz

And now the bad news. I am having some boot issues, but at this stage they don't appear to be motherboard / processor compatibility issues. I'l report back on this later.
 
Ubtree said:
Good news . . . and bad news.

I received the X3350 today (it had taken a week to clear Customs), and it booted without any problem in the IP35 Pro with its the pre-installed BIOS. I next successfully updated to 1.6 beta 10, and it re-booted again perfectly.

The BIOS reported the processor as follows:
Main processor: Intel(R) XEON(R) 2.72GHz(340X8.0, 4CPUs)
CPU Brand Name: Intel(R) XEON(R) CPU X3350 @ 2.66GHz

And now the bad news. I am having some boot issues, but at this stage they don't appear to be motherboard / processor compatibility issues. I'l report back on this later.
Click to expand...

Try different sticks of memory.
 
Smigit said:
I have a rampage arriving monday and an X3350 already here. If I remember I'll try and post up how it all goes.
Click to expand...

Let me Know how this goes and please post up some cpuz screen shots. is there any comfirmation that is cpu does is exactly the same as the q9450 and supports SSE4.
 
Hey guys, I'm still seting up the PC but the motherboard arrived today. I have a bit to do until I hit windows but I believe hardware wise im mostly done and I have hit post with the rampage formula + x3350 and it is detected as the X3350 in the Bios using the stock that was shipped which looks to be ver 0219. Ta

edit: Installing Vista now
 
Man...I'm getting so damn impatient with my Q9450 order. I just want to pick up one of these, but I can't find them!!!
 
I too have an X3350 and I have been pissing around with it for the last couple of days trying to get a decent OC but to no avail. I can post at 450x8 but I either get two cores to fail in Prime, BSOD, or my computer freezes/shuts down. Im on air not water and I have tried everything.

The only differences between teh CPU's are price (so it seems) and the Xeon is able to withstand more heat than the 9450.
 
CrAsHnBuRnXp said:
I too have an X3350 and I have been pissing around with it for the last couple of days trying to get a decent OC but to no avail. I can post at 450x8 but I either get two cores to fail in Prime, BSOD, or my computer freezes/shuts down. Im on air not water and I have tried everything.

The only differences between teh CPU's are price (so it seems) and the Xeon is able to withstand more heat than the 9450.
Click to expand...

So those rumors of 20% performance drop when gaming are unfounded? I've seen people post for and against such comments.
 
Yeah, those are rumors and unfounded. There's plenty of evidence on google, pointing out that the xeon equivalents are putting out the same numbers on the benchies.
 
Flexion said:
Yeah, those are rumors and unfounded. There's plenty of evidence on google, pointing out that the xeon equivalents are putting out the same numbers on the benchies.
Click to expand...

Nice! Sounds like it will be a good alternative to the Q9450 then. I find little motivation to upgrade from my Q6700 at present, however. I haven't seen enough of an overclocking benefit from the new Penryn to shell out the extra $300 for a new processor, even if it is more energy efficient and runs a little cooler. From what I've read, I'm actually less likely to hit 4.0GHz with the q9450 than with my 6700, due to the lower multi. I'm going to put in a nice water cooling system this is summer and push the crap out of my rig. I'll probably wait until nehalem before another major upgrade. I don't think I recommend anyone who currently owns a Q6600/Q6700 to pay the extra for 45nm just yet. Those that are looking for a brand new processor or to upgrade to quad core, definitely should consider both the Q9450 and the X3350, depending on price and availability. They are the current price/performance sweet spot right now.
 
500 FSB (hello FSB wall!) is necessary in order to achieve 4.0GHZ with a Q9650 or X3350.
The overclocking kings remain the Q6600 (budget) and QX9650 (money is no object).
 
RadXge said:
500 FSB (hello FSB wall!) is necessary in order to achieve 4.0GHZ with a Q9650 or X3350.
The overclocking kings remain the Q6600 (budget) and QX9650 (money is no object).
Click to expand...

And of course the Q6700, which will be very competitively priced come the 20th. I've seen reports of it hitting 4.0GHz as well - not as common as the Q6600 simply because there are a lot more of them out there due to pricing. Should change soon, though. I wish the Quads didn't have the FSB wall, because there are some mobos out there that can handle 500 just fine.
 
I have received the X3350,. It booted up without any problem in the IP35 Pro, and so far is running without any problem.

It's early days, but I think that the gamble has paid off!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top