X3350 or Q9450, which OC's better?

B

BoredTiger

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
443
Ok, I'm in an unusual position, where I actually took delivery of BOTH CPUs.


I'm wondering which processor I should try and OC first. Which one would OC better? The Xeon or the regular Q9450?


Any ideas?
 
Doesn't the Xeon reach stock speeds at a lower voltage? Thus, it would have more potential within the voltage constraints of the silicon?
 
neubspeed!

Thanks! :) That's the kind of information I wanted and probably need to read :)


So the better potential will come from the Xeon. Ok, that's the box I'll open then :)


Thanks!
 
your problem with either chip won't be voltage. Going from 1.35 to 1.45 yielded no better or more stable overclock. The thing that might hold back your OC might be your motherboard and how high a FBS you can get. It's all about the FBS with these chips because of the lowly 8x multiplier.
 
IMO they are the same chip, so your o/c should be the same... My thoughts (no hard data) is that there is no difference period.

3.6 should be a no brainer on either cpu. My X3350 doesn't like 3.8, and to be honest, I really haven't tried that hard to get there. With four cores at 3.6Ghz already, I'm too lazy so far to tweak for more. I will never get 4.0, so I'm pretty happy with the stable setup in my sig. 36% o/c by setting everything to auto except my memory. Like I said, it was a no brainer.
 
toddw,

that's actually what I'd like to get. 3.6.

I'd be VERY happy with that OC.

I just noticed from your sig that there's a P04 bios for the 790i so, i'll probably have to do that as well :)
 
As already mentioned, same chip and both will over clock better than your MB so it's a moot point IMO.
 
well if server/desktop is anything like it was with the athlon/opterons, the xeon should run cooler and overclock higher., but I have no experience with xeons.
 
From my reading, the xeons tend to have extra checks in the QC process and usually run at lower voltage. But as stated earlier, the FSB is going to end up being what holds you back on either chip.
 
Thanks you guys.

I'm leaning towards busting out the Q9450 and OCing it first and if it blows, moving onto the X3350.

One way or another I have to sell one of these bad boys.
 
Hey Konceptz...heheh hold your horses there :)

Let me try these bad boys out and then i'll let you know :) (you're first).


Thanks for asking though.


BT
 
I was just going to post the exact same question. Can you report back with which one you think is better (in your opinion). I'm at the point where my buddy at Intel can get me 50% off either one... now I just have to decide which one to get ;)
 
nice deal Vannguyen!

I'll let you know as soon as I get everything done. I finally got all the components in. I just have to plug in all the power plugs and load up the OS and I'm off the to OC races :p
 
Let me know too which one overclocks better as I was looking into getting a 45nm quad. Thanks
 
I haven't mentioned what motherboard I'm using, so I ignored that comment.

Despite what may seem to be "obvious" between Q9450 being the same as the X3350, I'm in the unique position to actually test that out myself. Basically, some people here are actually interested in an empirical test.

So there's really nothing to "get" here. Whether it truly matters or not, will be seen (which is the point of interest).

I for one, would LOVE to have a 3.82 OC on either the X3350 or the Q9450, but I doubt I'll be using the same cooling solution as you (I'm going air).

I'm targeting a 3.6, and that would make me plenty happy.
 
BoredTiger said:
I for one, would LOVE to have a 3.82 OC on either the X3350 or the Q9450, but I doubt I'll be using the same cooling solution as you (I'm going air).

I'm targeting a 3.6, and that would make me plenty happy.
Click to expand...

I'm on air

You'd be better off comparing MBs than the same processor. The FSB dies well before the CPU.

If you somehow have an 9450 and 3350 with unlocked multipliers, then your test would be worth your time.
 
Wow, that looks much smaller than this behemoth of a HSF that I have installed...(Tuniq Tower).

I knew I should have done more research! It's cheaper too!


Finally started to OC the damn thing...

Looking like 3.4 and above requires more volts than I expected (compared to some other folks). I'm having to pump my CPU voltage to 1.28 in order to run prime stable at the moment. I may be able to up the FSB just a tad bit more at this voltage.

Going to see how stable 3.4 is at 1.28 first overnight.

(at least I'm finally getting into this...now I'm wondering if my Q9450 will do better than this X3350).

* I did notice something strange with coretemp app, it identifies my CPU as X3250 (I didn't even know there was a X3250 - everywhere else the CPU is properly identified as X3350).
 
lol vannguyen, i am in the same boat as you.. my buddy at intel is getting me some crazy discounts too


120 for a qx9450 WOOT...however its back ordered and he placed my order about a month ago...


Im also curious to see the performance from a qx9450 and a x3350...


How are they the same and how are they different?
 
My watercooled X3350 is up to 3504MHZ with very little effort. I run Prime for over 19 hours with no errors. Look at sig for full spec. Voltage is still set to AUTO in BIOS.
 
I doubt that the X3350 is a better/worst overclocker than the Q9450.
Most X3350/Q9450 should overclock to 3.6 (sweet spot seems to be around 3.4) and the weakest link is the FSB limitation on current motherboards.
Personally, I prefer the X3350. Yep, X sounds cooler than Q!
 
stunning said:
lol vannguyen, i am in the same boat as you.. my buddy at intel is getting me some crazy discounts too


120 for a qx9450 WOOT...however its back ordered and he placed my order about a month ago...


Im also curious to see the performance from a qx9450 and a x3350...


How are they the same and how are they different?
Click to expand...
Q9450, not QX9450.

My intel hookup was $159, and is also lagging due to backorder. Ramp up, damnit!
 
Down8 said:
My intel hookup was $159, and is also lagging due to backorder. Ramp up, damnit!
Click to expand...

Same situation for me. Guess everyone is using their hookups to get this CPU :D Anyone know when supply is expected?
 
Hell, I'd just be happy to pay regular price to get one in stock. Guess I'll have to see how far I can push my Q9300 until stock becomes availabe.
 
Down8 said:
Q9450, not QX9450.

My intel hookup was $159, and is also lagging due to backorder. Ramp up, damnit!
Click to expand...

Yeah... my Intel hookup was $159 also... and yes... I probably won't get mine until Nehalem is released... :mad:
 
Either one will OC fairly well I'm sure, haven't gotten around to messing with mine, yet, school and need for a 1000% stable system holding me back.

BTW, IF you want to run dual down the road with a Skulltrail board then I'd stick to the X3350
 
I think I read somewhere that a guy claimed that ASUS mATX P5E is the only MB somehow can break the FSB limit of 9450 to some extent.
 
harbin said:
I think I read somewhere that a guy claimed that ASUS mATX P5E is the only MB somehow can break the FSB limit of 9450 to some extent.
Click to expand...

There's a thread on that in the mATX forums. I pvhk, and drazendread whre the two doing the testing I belive with the P5E-VM and the 45nm Quads. Officer Martinez was able to hit 500FSB with his Q6600.
 
Instigator said:
Either one will OC fairly well I'm sure, haven't gotten around to messing with mine, yet, school and need for a 1000% stable system holding me back.

BTW, IF you want to run dual down the road with a Skulltrail board then I'd stick to the X3350
Click to expand...
The X3xx0 Xeons won't fit in Skulltrail boards. They require X5xx0 CPUs.
 
stunning said:
i was thinking the same thing...isnt the skull trail board LGA771
Click to expand...

I just realized that, I saw an article talking about the Skulltrail with 2 QX9775 so I didn't look any closer, but hey it was a nice thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top