- Joined
- Jul 16, 2001
In my sig I have my trusty Core 2 Duo e6300 that has been a great processor. I've been able to run it at 3.5ghz until I got my evga 750i FTW board. I'm not sure if it is the board or the fact that Windows 7 isn't stable at that speed. I've tried everything. Back to the point. I'm going to get a quad for this board and would like to have a higher multiplier so I don't have to crank the fsb so high. I've narrowed it down to 4 processors.
First the q8400 and q9400. The only difference between them that I can tell is the L2 cache and possibly binning. The $20 difference would make me get the q9400 anyway but I wonder.
Second is the good old q6600. More cache than the first two, but in xeon form it is $20 more than the q9400 with 2mb more cache and a multi of 9 instead of 8.
Third is the q9550 with 4mb more cache than the q6600 bringing it to 12mb, and a 8.5 multi instead of 9.
Two more things. First is overclockability. I seem to remember the 45nm parts being able to oc more than the 65nm parts. That being said, everyone and their mom seems to run the q6600 at 3.6ghz with no problem. This is a fine speed for me. Second brings up the cache question. In gaming I've heard that is make little difference and that clockspeed is much more important. However, this cpu will find it's way into a server when I decide on a motherboard for my socket 1366 system. Isn't more cache supposed to be beneficial in a server?
Having said all of that I'd like to be more informed on the subject.
Thanks in advance.
First the q8400 and q9400. The only difference between them that I can tell is the L2 cache and possibly binning. The $20 difference would make me get the q9400 anyway but I wonder.
Second is the good old q6600. More cache than the first two, but in xeon form it is $20 more than the q9400 with 2mb more cache and a multi of 9 instead of 8.
Third is the q9550 with 4mb more cache than the q6600 bringing it to 12mb, and a 8.5 multi instead of 9.
Two more things. First is overclockability. I seem to remember the 45nm parts being able to oc more than the 65nm parts. That being said, everyone and their mom seems to run the q6600 at 3.6ghz with no problem. This is a fine speed for me. Second brings up the cache question. In gaming I've heard that is make little difference and that clockspeed is much more important. However, this cpu will find it's way into a server when I decide on a motherboard for my socket 1366 system. Isn't more cache supposed to be beneficial in a server?
Having said all of that I'd like to be more informed on the subject.
Thanks in advance.