HOT Q9650 E0 - $329.00

I gots to stop looking at Hot Deals forum :(

I may be in for 1.
 
Ordered one thanks. Hope this is not a price mistake like Buy.com GTX 280.
 
Why is this a hot deal? Wasn't it mentioned a while ago that Intel is cutting prices on the Q9650 to ~ $317?

http://www.hardware.fr/news/10062/baisse-quad-intel-18.html

img0025000nt7.gif
 
Great price, but isn't this what the new price with Intel's January 18th price drop? I've never understood why, but it seems that the Retail price ends up the same as the Intel price/1000 price.
 
mwave is same price. this is the new price for these, not a deal or anything, just a price update.
 
i paid around this for a q9550 6 weeks ago on a hot deal. only had it for a couple weeks, but a great cpu. if you are sticking with s775, this is the way to go (the q9550 for $268)
 
Blahman said:
More expensive and slower than an i7.
Click to expand...

more expensive, but with Gigabyte UD3p and 4 gigs of ram is cheaper than I7.

For those that want this; I would wait; prices will drop even lower, closer to $300 mark
 
What makes this processor better than a Q6600 G0 for $160 that can usually clock to 3.6 with ease?
 
dennisjai said:
I doubt the difference is that big, IMO, I would guess a 3.5ghz yorkfield is comparable to a 3.6 kentsfield.
Click to expand...

not trying to generalize the number but heres the cinebench result 45nm vs 65nm

2.66Ghz 45nm fall behind the QX6850 result.

 
anyone know the chances of actually receiving an E0 stepping from mwave? they do list it as an E0 stepping on the specs, but there is also a disclaimer that they're not responsible for differences stated on the specs..
 
I'm pretty sure they've been shipping E0 for awhile now so I doubt they are producing any older steppings.
 
I thought the easy OC on the q6600's was 3.0GHz. Is there actually a high percentage of these hitting 3.6?
 
i think the last ones were binned pretty well and don't OC..seeing as my local MC store has 2 returned open boxes (referring to q6600 debate here)
 
Xaero_toast said:
I thought the easy OC on the q6600's was 3.0GHz. Is there actually a high percentage of these hitting 3.6?
Click to expand...

Depends on the board, too. A board with really bad v-droop will have a hard time keeping a quad at 3.6 100% stable. There are plenty that do it. I've had two boards that wouldn't. 3.33 was the max I got to stable on my IN9 32x max. Anything 3.0 and above is touchy on both 780i boards I've had. On my P5Q pro? Easy peasy.

Any good P35/P45 should do a decent job. X38/48 should have no trouble as well.
 
wow newegg has it for... 349.99

im still debating. Because i know i desperately need to go Quad core. Ive been putting it off for a long time. But i feel going i7 is way to much money. Its not just the CPU, its the 300+ dollar mobo and ram too... when i can spend it on a new video card or ram for my current LGA775... i think i might jump on these when they drop more. they initial drop is always higher. ill give it another 2-3 weeks...
 
Warrior said:
wow newegg has it for... 349.99

im still debating. Because i know i desperately need to go Quad core. Ive been putting it off for a long time. But i feel going i7 is way to much money. Its not just the CPU, its the 300+ dollar mobo and ram too... when i can spend it on a new video card or ram for my current LGA775... i think i might jump on these when they drop more. they initial drop is always higher. ill give it another 2-3 weeks...
Click to expand...

If I were you (and if you need 45nm quad now), I'd just op for the Q9550 and use the extra $50+ to upgrade your GPU. Yeah, you only get 8.5x with the Q9550, but oh noes, I guess you "only" have a 3.8Ghz quad at 445FSB instead of 4GHz.

*and since you aren't currently on a 45nm dual, getting a higher clocked quad is already plenty improvement.
 
Don't buy a quad just yet unless you have actual need of it for encoding, etc...

Riddleofsteel said:
Is this worth getting over a Q9550 I might buy which is 50 bucks less?
Click to expand...

Having used several quad cores clocked at all speeds ranging from 2.5-3.94GHz, I never noticed much difference past 3.2 or so. Don't get me wrong, benches gave higher scores with higher clocks but when everything is so fast already... yeah, it's really a bit of a moot point.
 
Mav451 said:
If I were you (and if you need 45nm quad now), I'd just op for the Q9550 and use the extra $50+ to upgrade your GPU. Yeah, you only get 8.5x with the Q9550, but oh noes, I guess you "only" have a 3.8Ghz quad at 445FSB instead of 4GHz.

*and since you aren't currently on a 45nm dual, getting a higher clocked quad is already plenty improvement.
Click to expand...

This!

When the heck are the Q9550's going to drop?? STOP BUYING THEM PEOPLE!! They're supposed to be $266 now... I really want one. Don't need one. So I can WAIT.

But you know ... it's hard to wait. :p

For the record, my P5Q Pro will hit up to 499MHz FSB very, very stable with my Q6700. If anything I imagine that will be even easier with a 45nm that requires less power. My buddy has the Q9550 on his rig, which is on a crappy 780i, and he still managed to hit 4.0GHz. He can run 3.8 all day 100% stable with great temps.
 
Not all G0's will clock to 3.6 with ease. I would say though that almost all G0's will clock to 3.2ghz with ease though, and the chance of NOT hitting 3.2ghz will depend more on the board. I have a G0 that needs 1.5v for 3.6ghz, and it isnt 100% stable. This is on a P5Q as well.

Is the Q9650 worth it over the Q9550? The gauranteed E0 and 9x multi was worth it for me for ~50 bucks. According to the Intel Proc Finder...all Q9650's are E0 steppings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top