So what is the deal with the cpu multiplier on the Q9450? I hear it locked to x8? What was it for the Q6600?

What does that mean in terms of overclocking? The Q9450 won't overclock as well as the Q6600?

Like many others, I was looking forward to the Q9450, until I learned from other members here, that indeed the 8x multiplier will be a BIG problem when it comes to overclocking the Q94.
It will be possible to get to 4ghz, but you need to push the FSB to like 480mhz (correct me if I am wrong people)--- and not too many mobo's like to go that high (a gamble to get one that will).

So basically the Q9450's will be limited to FSB speeds, which is indeed a major let down for those of us who were thinking of taking it to a stable 4.5ghz =D

Bah well, like I need a quad for gaming anytime soon anyways =\... E8400, to the rescue, with it's 9x multiplier and $200 price tag w00t, it'll easily get to 4-4.5ghz!

4000MHz (target CPU speed) : 8 (max locked CPU multiplier) = 500MHz (required FSB)

Won't the upcoming X48 DDR2/DDR3 motherboards be able to push 500MHz?

Who said anything about 4.5GHz from a quad? Even the Extreme Editions (without FSB limitations) don't go far beyond 4GHz on air cooling. http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/i [...] spx?i=3184

And FYI, many P35 boards can exceed 450FSB. X38/X48 boards can do a little better, 500FSB is not out of the question.

I dono... I think I am going to still get one and give my q6600 to my little brother. It is a faster fsb, and runs cooler and quicker at stock. That is good enough for me.

As folks have pointed out, the Q9450 will likely be FSB limited.
However, that limit will likely be 3.6Ghz+ depending on your board.
At these speeds, your Quad core should run relatively cool and efficiently.

The Q6600 is generally limited to 3.4 or sometimes 3.6 Ghz and runs quite warm on air at these speeds.

So, the Q6600 will not be be better OCer since the Q9450 should hit the same to slightly higher speeds. The Q6600 will hit a CPU will and the Q9450 will hit the FSB wall.

Also don't forget that the Q9450 will also perform slightly better clock for clock.

The Q6600, however, may be the best bang for the buck with it being slightly cheaper to start, needing slightly slower RAM, and OCing on a cheaper Mobo to it's limits.

However the Q9450 can be pushed faster and at cooler speeds.
Your choice.

Unless you are certain your mobo can't do 450FSB, there is little reason to choose a Q6600 over a Q9450. A Q9450 @ 3.5GHz will outperform most Q6600s out there (it has a 5% IPC advantage remember) and run MUCH cooler. Yes, most Q6600s can do 3.6GHz, but usually needs a voltage bump to 1.4V, which puts it at around the 165W mark. I'm confident a Q9450 would do 3.6GHz at close to stock volts, which should keep the the chip under the 100W mark.

It's not all about the boards.

There are P35s that will do 550 FSB on a dual core but can't push over 450 FSB on a quad.

That said, hopefully we will see 460-470 on X38s, but I don't think we'll be seeing 500 on quads.

The even MORE interesting point now is the 4 layer PCB of the P35 "budget" boards that is apparently causing noise issues with the Yorkfields. What effect is that going on have on high FSB operation on "value" boards?

Edit: Also I don't think anyone (atleast I'm not) is making the argument that the Yorkfield will be limited by anything other then the FSB wall and the multiplier.

QX9650 475 Max FSB X38

That 475 is the highest I've seen.. I doubt the "Bottom" bin Q9450s will pull that high, but here's hoping they do. Don't get me wrong, I was really hoping for a Penryn.. the move to 1333 MHz killed me though.

Is there any word if the upcoming X48 DDR2/DDR3 motherboards be able to push 500MHz for quad?

Even assuming P35's are limited to 450FSB, that is still 3.6GHz on the 8x multiplier. I'm not sure what everyones expectations are, but 3.6GHz is pretty close to being the 'sweet spot' for Yorkfield overclocking - it represents an ideal balance between high performance and low power consumption.

Have a look at this chart of QX9650 power consumption as you increase clockspeeds. Past 3.6GHz power consumption increases VERY rapidly.

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/i [...] i=3184&p=3



So unless you are the ones intent on pumping an insane amount of volts into a Yorkfield just to make it run at 4GHz+ instead of 3.6GHz at 'reasonable' voltages, I don't see what the problem with the Q9450 is? A Q9450 @ 'only' 3.6GHz is the performance equivalent a Q6600 @ 3.8GHz, how many Q6600s can do 3.8GHz on air? Not many.

Frankly, I think the Q9450 8x multiplier limitation is way blown out of proportion. Yes, if you are an extreme overclocker looking for 4.5GHz, it is not the chip for you. For everyone else, it represents a good choice, as long as your mobo can reach 450FSB, like I said earlier...

Don't get me wrong Epsilon, I agree with you on a lot of stuff, except that it's just not for me, and I'm speaking from my perspective.

I actually think it will be a great 400x8 Mainstream chip. 3.2 GHz quad will be plenty for a while.

Personally I don't think a 24/7 450 FSB OC on a P35 is that advisable anyways..

As long as the NB is adequately cooled, I don't see what the problem with 450FSB is? If it's stable, it's stable, right?

Like I said, it all depends on your expectations of Yorkfield. If you are expecting 4GHz+ from a Q9450 then that is not realistic. 3.4GHz - 3.6GHz however is a very realistic goal. It may not outperform Q6600s by much, but it sure runs WAY cooler. This may not be important to some people, but it's important to me. I demand a quiet system and a 150W+ CPU just don't do. In fact, I may very well run it at 8x400 as you suggested, I may even be able to slightly undervolt it at this speed and have it close to 50W.

Are you kidding me P35 450 FSB limiti,,,"no". I have mine at home running 455x8 3.64~Ghz constant 1.5v. I am actualy in a contest right now for overclocking and I cranked it up to 491x8 3.93~ Ghz roughly. I ran my 3dmark on it with no problems but, then backed it down afterwards of course but yes it is fine to do that. I should know. I can actually get my speed faster then that probably if I want to.

What CPU are you currently running? I hope you are running a quad because 500FSB on a dual is nothing special on a P35.

I'm guessing he has an E6750 considering it's an 8x... from an earlier thread... but..

E4400 Reference
E6750


Anyways, 500 FSB is pretty easy on a dual, as Epsilon already said.

I better be able to get 444 fsb with my $260 motherboard. I have a GA-P35-DQ6. Wait actually never mind I have seen people get it already with my motherboard. It is hot but, I will only leave it there for maybe 30 minutes and it will be in an ice box basically so. I'm sorry my current processor is a E6750 yes.

Lets consider this. Its is a new fabrication(45nm) and HK/MG process. If a QX9650 OC'ed to 4GHz runs 15-20c cooler than a QX6850 OC'ed to 4GHz and uses less power what do you think?

I think if there is a 15-20c drop in temps when OC'ed to the same speeds that means you can OC higher. I would sau a Q6600 running at 3.2GHz would mean a Q9450 running at 3.6GHz on air and probably roughly the same temps/voltage if not less.

The Q9450 will be a great chip and probably the next Q6600. I can't wait to see if they release a G0 stepping of it and lower the temps and volt usage so you can OC higher.

Is there any word if the upcoming X48 DDR2/DDR3 motherboards be able to push 500MHz for quad?

Also, how long after the release of the first gen Q6600 was it until the G0 stepping version was released?

If it is a few months to about a year for the Q9450 G0, wouldn't Nehalem be out at that point?