Buy old, overclock and spend some damn money on the games...
But then again if you have money to burn go for this and some phase charge cooling unit and see if you can hit 6GHz quad core :) mmm sounds nice 24GHz machine
Is it news to someone that the X-series costs MUCH? Maybe the least interesting processor on the market tbh, not like someone with any sense would buy one..
Great as a halo product, but there are far better options to buy.
Theres the overclocked q9450 (8 multi) option to get the same performance for a fifth of the price that most sane people would choose, or the dual overclocked e5430 (8 multi)and a skulltrail board for the cost of this cpu alone, which will provide double the potential performance for highly multithreaded code (and the bragging rights of a dual cpu system).
I have a feeling the only true enthusiasts that will have these puppies will be those benchmarkers that intel have provided them to to promote the yorkfield/harpertown architecture.
Concerning the toasty character of this CPU, I read a few days ago that there are concerns regarding the manufacturing quality of this chip.
It's apparently being manufactured at another site than the QX9650, the CPU draws a much higher current resulting in temps which are much higher than they should be. It's power consumption is very good considering it's performance, the article sited this as an indication of the flaw.
Intel are aware of the issues and are investigating potential manufacturing flaws. Lets hope that by the time this hit's the streets that it's much cooler.
Originally Posted by CanadianViking I'd rather go with that 3.2 Ghz Athlon one... I've seen it for sale at $183... compared to $1600?
This CPU costs as much as I'm gonna spend on my new computer...
Just look at the similarly priced e6750's results in the article. And the e6750 has some overclocking headroom wheras the x2 has very little untapped potential. In fact you can get the e8200 wolfdale for the same price which is a bit faster again yet cooler.
Your always going to get better bang for your buck at the low end, and extracting the final few performance increases get increasingly costly.
I'm still going for the Q6600. With an X38 board I can afford to overclock to 3GHz and get the performance of a QX6850 for buttons. I also get future upgrade potential to the 45nm chips when I can justify getting one (and PCI-E 2.0 don't forget).
This chip is a complete waste of money. Anyone that wants an unlocked multiplyer would get the cheaper QX9650 which also seems to OC better. Q9450 is nice but you won't be able to hit 4Ghz with 8 multi.
Comments 1 to 25 of 27
Sam
looks like 2008 will be a very boring year...
Yep, it's what happens when you have one party dominating proceedings (both in marketshare and in performance).
We want to get a Q9450 now and see if we can run it at these speeds - £200 part for £900 performance?
But then again if you have money to burn go for this and some phase charge cooling unit and see if you can hit 6GHz quad core :) mmm sounds nice 24GHz machine
If it overclocks, then yes it might well be just that. :)
Theres the overclocked q9450 (8 multi) option to get the same performance for a fifth of the price that most sane people would choose, or the dual overclocked e5430 (8 multi)and a skulltrail board for the cost of this cpu alone, which will provide double the potential performance for highly multithreaded code (and the bragging rights of a dual cpu system).
I have a feeling the only true enthusiasts that will have these puppies will be those benchmarkers that intel have provided them to to promote the yorkfield/harpertown architecture.
And about qx9770, just calculate price/performance.
To slow for to much money.In economical view-> Long ago gone...
q9450 is a bit too expensive to upgrade to. and q9300 is good, but 7.5 mutli isn't very desirable.
Concerning the toasty character of this CPU, I read a few days ago that there are concerns regarding the manufacturing quality of this chip.
It's apparently being manufactured at another site than the QX9650, the CPU draws a much higher current resulting in temps which are much higher than they should be. It's power consumption is very good considering it's performance, the article sited this as an indication of the flaw.
Intel are aware of the issues and are investigating potential manufacturing flaws. Lets hope that by the time this hit's the streets that it's much cooler.
This CPU costs as much as I'm gonna spend on my new computer...
Your always going to get better bang for your buck at the low end, and extracting the final few performance increases get increasingly costly.
Now, where's that components list...
Andy
Btw by June shouldnt the price of this processor go down $200 like the QX9650?