![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| Welcome to Windows Vista Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find solutions with any problems, errors or issues you are experiencing with Windows Vista. The Vista forum also covers news and updates and has an extensive Windows Vista tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks. |
| |||||||
![]() |
| |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Vista Ultimate x64 | QX6850 vs the Q9550 I've had a thread like this already once.. Here it is John.. I got it. sitting in front of me. in my hands is a QX6850. ahhh It's very very tempting to throw into my system. I'm struggling on deciding weather I should keep this thing. or sell it for doulbe what I paid and get a Q9550. the QX uses 130W the Q9550 uses 65. the Q9550 is newer technology, smaller, cooler, less power. but might not Oc as well. but then again maybe it will Here's my problem. I'll either hit a OC wall with heat with this QX6850, or I will hit a FSB on my motherboard with the Q9550 and the 8.5x multi. what should I do??? |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| Vista Ultimate x64 | Re: QX6850 vs the Q9550 hmm hmm hmm. I've decided to do away with the QX6850. I don't want something that hot that needs 130w just to idle. I was planning on getting the Q9550 for $289.00 or whatever tomorrow after I sell this QX6850. But now I'm thinkin maybe I should just take the $425 I was offered for the QX6850, and put all 425. plus an additional $90 or so. and just get the Q9650. it's the newest and fastest thing out. Runs at 4.0 GHz easily on Air.. and it's Garuantee'd to be E0 stepping. but is that really worth it. Is the Q9650 with E0 stepping for 500 really worth it over the Q9550 with C1 stepping and 300.. So $200 extra for maybe 200 MHz more of an OC? with the Q9550 I'm pretty sure I could hit 3.9 or 4.0. and with the Q9650 I'm hearing people are hitting that VERY VERY easily. so maybe the stepping really is all that. Is it worth the 200??? |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #3 (permalink) |
| Windows 7 x64 | Re: QX6850 vs the Q9550 The Q9550 would be better. Being 45nm, runs cooler and quicker than the QX6850 once overclocked. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| Vista Ultimate x64 | Re: QX6850 vs the Q9550 yup.. I'm selling it. I've decided that for sure. I'm in a fight with myself right now as if I should get the Q9550, or the Q9650. I'm thinkin while I have the money and the chance I might as well get the Q9650. It's E0. and people all across the net, well the few that have it. are ALL reaching 4.0 GHz on them. on air. with idle temps around 33-38C and thats amazing. I can't do that. I get those temps at 3.33 GHz with the Q6700. and thats about it. lol I've seen almost every owner of a Q9650 get to 4.0 GHz on air stable. and plenty going to 4.2 GHz on air and then thats getting pretty hot. and my temps do pretty well. and I'm giong into winter here. but it's 200 more.. thats a lot. I think I might as well just do it and enjoy it. also I just am installing Crysis Warhead as we speak. I can't wait to play it. right now. I'll let you all know how i like it! |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| Vista Ultimate x64 | Re: QX6850 vs the Q9550 good game. runs great! |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #6 (permalink) |
| Vista Ultimate x64 | Re: QX6850 vs the Q9550 Anyone wanna buy my QX6850 CPU.. shoot me a PM if so. thanks! |
My System Specs![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| QX6850 vs. Q9550......... | Chillout Room | |||