Intel Q9450

i_got_a_mohawk · #1 02-17-2008, 08:07 AM

Just wondering if anyone has any opinions about this new CPU? I was originally looking at a Q6600, but, quite tempted to pay the extra £50ish to get the newer CPU.

Quad core, clocks at 2.66Ghz stock (as opposed to the 2.4Ghz stock of the Q6600). Has a 1333 Mhz FSB (the Q6600 is 1066 Mhz). And it also has a 12Mb L2 cache (the Q6600 is 8Mb)

Uses the new 45nm process, so it should produce less heat.

Does it have the overclock potential of the Q6600?

Is it a worthy choice for a computer that is used for alot of gaming and audio work?

Will the benifits of the increased L2 cache and FSB be useful?

Cheers!

iamlowsound · #2 02-17-2008, 12:19 PM

I have no idea what any of that means, but for computers I think that you should always spend as much as you can afford and get the best stuff that is out. The reason? You will be able to run it longer and you wont have to upgrade as soon.

lowsound

i_got_a_mohawk · #3 02-17-2008, 12:26 PM

Thats my reasoning too

Just want to see if anyone knows it to be a dud or something!

Matt_W · #4 02-17-2008, 12:55 PM

If it is on the 45nm process, you should be able to overclock it even more, I doubt you'll need to though.

DigMe · #5 02-17-2008, 09:01 PM

The 9450 is not out over here yet but that is probably what I'm going to get. I already have my money set aside and ready to buy. The increased cache will indeed help a lot. It will be more efficient and faster than the Q6600 as well.

Even if you get a slightly lesser Penryn (the code name for the newer 45nm chips) you'll still be ahead of the game over the Q6600.

brad