I'm still hesitating to get the QX9650 ... is it worth it for a new OC'er?
Do you think it would do a 400fsb x 10 multiplier = 4 Ghz on air?
I was thinking about the Zalman 9700 since it has thermal paste etc included and it seems to fit most MB&cases.
Probably I'll get the 790i and since it has data corruption with high fsb I was thinking about this option.
Any advice would be great, I'd like to keep the main system for a few years, and only upgrade the gfx.

advise? the 9700 sucks...

Get a good heatsink:

http://www.frostytech.com/top5heatsinks.cfm

Eh? Its #5 on the top 10 list here: http://www.frostytech.com/top5heatsinks.cfm

The Q6700 also has a 10x multiplier and it's much cheaper.

wow that xigmatek @ $37 from newegg is one heck of a good deal!

I may be wrong, but I didn't think the Q9450 had a 10x multiplier?

Great list, ok... the Zalman 9700 seems the best I can find at my e-tail site.
Since it is 5th in ranking and after reading some reviews it seems good.
So why is it bad ?
Should I order my cooler elsewhere and pay more for delivery?
I also want a rather common cooler to avoid problems that it would not fit.

OK, a little advice from a QX9650 owner. You can check my computer configuration for details. A 400FSB with a 10 multiplier will theoretically get 4 ghz, but that probably won't happen unless you do something exotic. My highest stable clock so far has been 3825 mhz using a 425FSB and a 9 multiplier. I know it can be raised, but that will take more experimentation. The Zalman 9700 is a good heatsink, but its not up to the job for higher overclocks. I'd expect a max overclock of around 3.6 ghz with the Zalman 9700. Check Anandtech's various heatsink tests for specifics on which heatsinks and fans do the best job. Don't get too concerned with super high clocks. They are good for speed runs and benches, but for everyday use, they have no value. AMD was right years ago when they said their chips did more work per cycle and therefore could do more than Intel's faster chips. A QX9650 can do more work at 3.6 ghz than a lessor chip which is clocked faster, and the QX9650 will produce less heat and use less energy doing it. In computers, we are leaving the days behind where overclocking showed big gains in doing everyday tasks and in gaming.

As far as the 790i, it has a mixed reputation from what I've read. As I also built with the idea of keeping my build for about 5 years or so, I invested in good hardware. It cost a bit more now, but the average cost is cheaper over a 5 year run. A main consideration of the different motherboards is whether you plan on SLI or Crossfire. I bought a X48 and choose the Crossfire option. Others will prefer SLI, so they choose Nvidia as its the only chipset that will run SLI. You make your choices and live with them.

As to picking a mobo that uses DDR3, I went for one that uses DDR2. In a couple years, DDR3 might show a good advantage, but for now, its very high priced for the little that it gives. The fact is, it may never show a marked advantage. Some people have thought that it will take DDR4 before we see another great increase over DDR2. I don't know about that, as I'm not an engineer, but I can observe the present situation and DDR2 is best for now and the near future. Get 8 gig of ram while you're at it, as programs will probably be using 8 gig within a few years.

Just a few words from a QX9650 owner.

The Q9450 has a 8x multiplier.

The Q9450 has a 8x multiplier so 425x8=3.4Ghz seems safe.

Maybe the QX9650 it's not worth it, would this 0.6Ghz be worth 500$ on a good gaming rig?

My friend owned a zalman 9700... To be quite frank... its too expensive for the performance and the included fan is LOUD even at ~7v, and its a pain in the ass to replace, plus doing that obviously voids the warrenty. Your much better off getting a HS that allows you to pick your own fans

Thanks for all the info sailor... I guess I'll get a 9450 or 9550 in that case.
As for memory, I'd be happy with 1:1 DDR2 if I'd go with crossfireX.
I could get 2 HD 4870's next month but the X2's will only launch later.
Now I can't play Crysis but I already bought one you see ;-) for a 24".
If I go 790i with 2 EVGA 9800gtx , I could use there step-up program in juli and get the 9900 series (hopefully with the G200). I don't want the 780i.

It would be great if there are ATI cards with a step up program, anyone?
Then I'd get a X48 without hesitation and could probably OC better since the Nvidia boards have problems with corrupt data in OC.

Hard choices... ;-)

I dont have a Q9450 but I can tell you that going from 3.6ghz - 4.0ghz gave me no additional FPS on Crysis.I was so suprised,confused and a little upset that my upgrade from an E6550 OC'd 3.33 to a E8400 did not help the game much.