![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Q9650 to Core i5 750
- Thread starter natty
- Start date
not much
BaldHeadedDork
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2003
- Messages
- 532
+1 It's a wash.
Clock-for-clock the i5/i7 isn't a better performer than the C2Q. The advantage is that it runs cooler and has a feature to boost CPU speed in single-core applications.
Clock-for-clock the i5/i7 isn't a better performer than the C2Q. The advantage is that it runs cooler and has a feature to boost CPU speed in single-core applications.
I've always heard that clock for clock the i5/i7 is faster than the Core2 family.
I found some benchmarks here:
http://www.legionhardware.com/artic...re_2_quad_and_phenom_ii_x4_performance,1.html
I found some benchmarks here:
http://www.legionhardware.com/artic...re_2_quad_and_phenom_ii_x4_performance,1.html
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,823
i5/i7 is faster then c2q, it is a new architecture, built in memory controller, plenty of things that do make it faster, now how much faster is another story.
muddocktor
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2001
- Messages
- 982
Yeah, it might score higher in benchmarks but I can hardly notice a perceivable difference between my QX9650@4 GHz and my 980X@4 GHZ in day to day stuff. I've been trying to tune the 980X since I got it, so I still have the QX950 as my main system for now. I haven't tried looking at how much faster the 980X will be in something like ripping a movie to my Zune yet though.
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,823
i loved my 9650!
JMCB
Gawd
- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 651
Stick with the 9650. Get a SSD if you're looking for a noticeable upgrade. System boots in seconds, not minutes.
Actually, I wouldn't buy a 775 CPU these days because all of them are too expensive for the performance that they deliver. (For example, if you don't live near a MicroCenter, that Q9550 purchased "new" costs almost $300!) And I would personally not spend a single penny on a soon-to-be-obsolete platform. (But then again, 1156 and 1366 has only a couple of years left in their lives anyway.)
And the only reason for the continued presence of 775 CPUs is that there has been a glut of motherboards for that socket that are still on the market.
Quadcore will be faster than the dual core. But try to find a good deal on the q9550, you should be able to get it for 225 or less. I jumped to i7 because my previous platform was outdated and i7 920s are great bang for the buck. The expensive part was the motherboard.
Q9550 to i5 750 on same clock will see a huge gain if you use multi-GPU setup.
I am A HUGE GAIN... especially overclock...
I jump from Q6600 @ 3.8G to i7 920 (same as 750), and in my games that I have tried, the gain is fairly large with 5970.
I am A HUGE GAIN... especially overclock...
I jump from Q6600 @ 3.8G to i7 920 (same as 750), and in my games that I have tried, the gain is fairly large with 5970.
GotNoRice
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2001
- Messages
- 12,017
Your post is full of fail.
Perhaps you could quantify where the “large gain” with multi-GPU comes from? With the P55 chipset you are looking at 8x/8x crossfire the same as you would if you were coming from a P45 chipset. You don’t get 16x 16x crossfire until you go to the X58.
Also your comparison is bunk. Even if the jump from a Q6600 to an i7 920 is significant, neither of those are processors being talked about in this thread. The Q9650 is faster than the Q6600. The Q6600 uses the original 65nm kentsfield core. And has 8mb L2 cache (4 per pair of cores) The Q9650 uses the newer 45nm Yorkfield core and has 12mb cache (6 per pair of cores). In addition, the i5 750 is certainly not equal to the i7 920. You’re talking about Lynnfield vs. Bloomfield, double-channel DDR3 vs. Triple-channel DDR3, Hyperthreading vs. none, different sockets, different chipsets etc.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 25,321
I would not do it.
I doubt very much you will see any tangible difference in real life situations.
you may benchmark better, but probably not by much, if at all.
I built an I7 920 system a few months back, used it for a few weeks then quickly sold it off and went back to my Q9650...it just wasn't worth it
I doubt very much you will see any tangible difference in real life situations.
you may benchmark better, but probably not by much, if at all.
I built an I7 920 system a few months back, used it for a few weeks then quickly sold it off and went back to my Q9650...it just wasn't worth it
Living near a MicroCenter is really the only reason that's fueling my desire to stay with 775.
I figured I'm going to just skip the Nehalem generation all together since all I really do is game on my PC and my buddy with a Q9550 is extremely pleased with it. Figured I'd save some money and just go that route. I definitely don't plan on keeping it at stock clocks either!
AFAIK, the only difference between Q9650 and Q9550 are the multipliers and default clock speed right?
Right.
CyberJunk
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2005
- Messages
- 4,242
oh yea you will see a night and day difference if you do that!!!
That's what I thought but for the performance you get and the amount of money you pay sticking with 775 is the way to go. You only have to replace the CPU not mobo and memory which adds to the cost. Not to mention reformat.
At best i5 might be 15% faster after stable overclock etc, but also cost $100+ more to upgrade over Q9550 after selling your old hardware.
Actually, I wouldn't even upgrade the CPU at all if I were to stick with 775. This is because even at $225, the Q9550 costs nearly $100 more than its performance justifies (considering that Socket 775 CPUs are now out of production, and stock is now limited to what is currently in warehouses). And if a motherboard upgrade is required just to even support the current 775 CPUs (this applies to those who are still on the early 775 chipset motherboards and those with certain nForce chipsets), I might as well upgrade the entire platform.
Last edited:
It all depends. If OP has a high clocked 4gh dual core I wouldn't recommend upgrading either but if 3ghz and lower and these quad optimized apps/games are becoming more of a chore why not upgrade to Q9550 that cost same as i5 750? Performance is so close that difference is negligible. If Q9550 become obsolete so would i5 750.
I was in the same shoe as the OP while back. Either upgrade to Q9550 or go i platform. I went ahead and upgraded to 1156 and a i3 wanting to upgrade to i7 860 down the road. I dropped nearly $200 after selling my old setup just to get 30% faster in quad optimized apps/games when I could have spent $150 on a Q9550 and perform in line with i5 750. Mind you current 775 prices are the pits. Try selling your old 775 motherboard in the FS/FT or ebay. You will basically be giving away your old hardware at the prices that go for.
+1
Maybe I'll bump up the voltage a push for 4.2ghz...
*
I don't see it as an upgrade to go from a q9650 to an i5 750.
If you're building new? i5 all the way, it isn't worth the money to build a socket 775 system.
If you already have plenty of fast ddr2 and a good p45 or x48 board, pick up a q9550 go for a 1ghz overclock.
This doesn't make sense.
OP - You have the best of the last-gen, and you're jumping to the low-end of the next-gen? Particularly if it's at 3.8Ghz or more, the only reason to upgrade at all is if multi-GPU scaling is a concern. In that case, the x58 would be compelling, but again no reason to look at the budget Lynnfield option.
*and after a quick search, seems you had a DFI P45 board + Q9650 (and you're selling the proc right now). I dunno man, this seems an odd way to go IMO. You aren't gonna see a substantial bump.
OP - You have the best of the last-gen, and you're jumping to the low-end of the next-gen? Particularly if it's at 3.8Ghz or more, the only reason to upgrade at all is if multi-GPU scaling is a concern. In that case, the x58 would be compelling, but again no reason to look at the budget Lynnfield option.
*and after a quick search, seems you had a DFI P45 board + Q9650 (and you're selling the proc right now). I dunno man, this seems an odd way to go IMO. You aren't gonna see a substantial bump.
It warms my heart to see your Q9550 doing so well on the same motherboard I have. I got one sitting next to me about to go in after my H50 is delivered. Hoping it does well.
I just upgraded from a Q6600 to a Q9550 a few weeks ago. It wasn't much more than $225 on Amazon at the time. It was an easy overclock to 4 GHz. Going to an i7 was going to cost 3 times that by the time I bought a mobo, RAM, and a CPU. Just couldn't justify it. Nothing wrong with a 775 chip at 4 GHz. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, an SSD would be money better spent than going from 775 to i5/i7.
This assumes that the existing motherboard already supports the later 45nm quad-core CPUs (even if you have to update the BIOS version for the board to properly support the newer CPUs).
On the other hand, if a new motherboard and new memory are required just to even support the Q9550 (say, you have a Pentium 4 or Pentium D CPU, a motherboard which cannot support the 45nm CPUs even with a BIOS update and DDR2-533 or slower RAM which likely cannot be carried over to a new DDR2 motherboard which likely does not support memory speeds slower than DDR2-667), then all bets are off: The total cost of this LGA775 upgrade would have been almost as high as a complete i7 upgrade simply because DDR2-667/800 prices are now just about as high per GB as the current going prices for DDR3-1600 memory.
Last edited: