# O9550 Vs Q9650



## Scubie67

From what I have heard the Q9650 has 2.83 clock compared to Q9550's 2.66 as well as .5 higher multi and EO stepping is it worth the extra $220 dollars for these features?

 Also will both these processors not need a bios flash with either the P45 or x48 Motherboards? As this is my first build I would like to keep it pretty much trouble free.


----------



## Geoff

IMO it's not worth it, the Q9550 used to be around $530 a week ago or so before it dropped in price.  It should work in those motherboard without a BIOS flash, however a few have needed them.  Check out the manufacturers website and see what BIOS revision is needed for the Q9550/Q9650.


----------



## Scubie67

[-0MEGA-];1046459 said:
			
		

> IMO it's not worth it, the Q9550 used to be around $530 a week ago or so before it dropped in price.  It should work in those motherboard without a BIOS flash, however a few have needed them.  Check out the manufacturers website and see what BIOS revision is needed for the Q9550/Q9650.




Thx for the reply,Omega.Does the new EO stepping make much of a difference?Or if its so new maybe people havent tinkered around enough with it to know?


----------



## Geoff

Honestly I haven't heard anything about a new EO stepping, do you have a link to where it says otherwise?


----------



## Scubie67

[-0MEGA-];1046471 said:
			
		

> Honestly I haven't heard anything about a new EO stepping, do you have a link to where it says otherwise?




 One of the Moderators on this thread on another forum mentions it has a new stepping I just assumed he knew what he was talking about.Hehe I know about the assume anology .LOL


http://www.tech-forums.net/pc/f76/did-q9550-just-drop-200-a-182154/index3.html


----------



## Geoff

Scubie67 said:


> One of the Moderators on this thread on another forum mentions it has a new stepping I just assumed he knew what he was talking about.Hehe I know about the assume anology .LOL
> 
> 
> http://www.tech-forums.net/pc/f76/did-q9550-just-drop-200-a-182154/index3.html


Oh gotcha, I didn't have to read that but now I know what he was talking about.  Same as the B3 vs G0 stepping of the Q6600, where the G0 was newer, and in turn yielded better overclocking and ran cooler.


----------



## Scubie67

Well if its like The q6600 B3 and Go that is a pretty big upgrade


----------



## mep916

[-0MEGA-];1046491 said:
			
		

> Same as the B3 vs G0 stepping of the Q6600, where the G0 was newer, and in turn yielded better overclocking and ran cooler.



Actually, I don't think the revision is that dramatic. According to Intel, these are the only changes to the Q9550:

- New SSpec and MM numbers for the converting products
- CPUID will change from 0x10677 to 0x1067A
- Package change to Halide free package

However, I do agree that the Q9650 isn't really worth the price. The Q9550 is at a great price, atm, and it'll probably go $20-$30 lower by the end of August.


----------



## Geoff

mep916 said:


> Actually, I don't think the revision is that dramatic. According to Intel, these are the only changes:
> 
> - New SSpec and MM numbers for the converting products
> - CPUID will change from 0x10677 to 0x1067A
> - Package change to Halide free package
> 
> However, I do agree that the Q9650 isn't really worth the price. The Q9550 is at a great price, atm, and it'll probably go $20-$30 lower by the end of August.


From people on the overlock.net (as well as other forums), the G0 can easily hit 3.8-4GHz, whereas lots of people with the B3 Q6600 could only hit around 3.4-3.6GHz, while it could just be a coincidence, that would be very odd to have those kinds of results.


----------



## mep916

[-0MEGA-];1046561 said:
			
		

> From people on the overlock.net (as well as other forums), the G0 can easily hit 3.8-4GHz, whereas lots of people with the B3 Q6600 could only hit around 3.4-3.6GHz, while it could just be a coincidence, that would be very odd to have those kinds of results.



lol. No, the G0 *was* a big improvement. The E0 stepping of the Q9550 isn't, I don't believe, and the changes I posted in my previous post affect the Q9550. So, what I meant to say was that I don't think you can compare the Q6600 revision with the Q9550 revision. 

Does that make sense?


----------



## Scubie67

mep916 said:


> lol. No, the G0 *was* a big improvement. The E0 stepping of the Q9550 isn't, I don't believe, and the changes I posted in my previous post affect the Q9550. So, what I meant to say was that I don't think you can compare the Q6600 revision with the Q9550 revision.
> 
> Does that make sense?



Was there a revision of the Q9550 also? I thought it was just the Q9650 that got the EO as it was just released a few days ago? I went on Gigabytes site and it has (X48)support listed for the Qx9650 but not the Q9650 or either they may have just not updated it yet?


----------



## mep916

Scubie67 said:


> Was there a revision of the Q9550 also? I thought it was just the Q9650 that got the EO as it was just released a few days ago? I went on Gigabytes site and it has (X48)support listed for the Qx9650 but not the Q9650 or either they may have just not updated it yet?



Here's a short article about the revision: http://tcmagazine.com/comments.php?shownews=21241&catid=2

As of the 22nd, the Q9550 will be revised from C-1 to the E0 stepping. Yeah, the Gigabyte site probably hasn't updated yet.


----------



## Scubie67

Okies thanks for the link.I guess I can wait a bit to see results of people buying both those proc.As a beginner builder I am a little intimidated by it anyways.I am wanting to wait for the Hd 4870 X2 also to see some real world benchies with it when it comes out


----------



## Compequip

i vote 9550 save the extra 200 and buy a nicer video card... HEHE


----------



## mep916

Scubie67 said:


> I am wanting to wait for the Hd 4870 X2 also to see some real world benchies with it when it comes out



Well, the NDA on the card will be lifted tomorrow, so expect all the benchies here in a couple hours.


----------



## Scubie67

Compequip said:


> i vote 9550 save the extra 200 and buy a nicer video card... HEHE



Yeah i am thinking of either that or the Q9650.I was thinking with Q9650 it might be easier to get a 4.0 OC that would be nice with 4 cores and would last me a few years.Then pick up maybe the 2nd or 3rd generation of Nehalem after they work out the bugs on it.Would have to get a new MB anyways so you might as well get a proc.that will last as long as possible.


----------



## Scubie67

mep916 said:


> Well, the NDA on the card will be lifted tomorrow, so expect all the benchies here in a couple hours.


 

Finally hehe..


----------



## mep916

Scubie67 said:


> Finally hehe..



It's suppose to be on sale tomorrow, as well.


----------



## Scubie67

mep916 said:


> It's suppose to be on sale tomorrow, as well.




found this link off of toms...I didnt know it was going to be 2 gb of memory 


http://www.provantage.com/sapphire-100251sr~7SAPP010.htm


----------



## mep916

Yep...2GB of GDDR5. 

I'm hoping newegg has it on sale at 12AM so I can buy it tonight.


----------



## Scubie67

mep916 said:


> Yep...2GB of GDDR5.
> 
> I'm hoping newegg has it on sale at 12AM so I can buy it tonight.



Well I guess it would perform better than 2 separate hd 4870 crossfired cards then regardless to what people saying.Might not even need to crossfire to max all games.I am wanting to upgrade to 1900 x 1200 from a 22 " and I was wondering if I would have to crossfire to max Crysis and such.

 Mep ,if you get one please post your results for those of us who are too scared to be the first ones out of the gate on it.


----------



## mep916

Scubie67 said:


> Well I guess it would perform better than 2 separate hd 4870 crossfired cards then regardless to what people saying.



Not necessarily. In many cases, the Crossfired 3870s' performed better than the X2 model. There will be several comparisons posted at various websites in the next couple days. 



Scubie67 said:


> Mep ,if you get one please post your results for those of us who are too scared to be the first ones out of the gate on it.



I'll post some benchmarks.


----------



## mep916

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/HD_4870_X2/


----------



## Scubie67

mep916 said:


> Not necessarily. In many cases, the Crossfired 3870s' performed better than the X2 model. There will be several comparisons posted at various websites in the next couple days.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll post some benchmarks.




With that much memory its gotta be good at high resolutions I bet.I want to be able to see pollen on the leaves in top end games...LOL


----------



## mep916

Scubie67 said:


> With that much memory its gotta be good at high resolutions I bet.I want to be able to see pollen on the leaves in top end games...LOL



According to TPU, the GTX 280 is outperforming the X2 in Crysis. 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/HD_4870_X2/9.html


----------



## Scubie67

mep916 said:


> According to TPU, the GTX 280 is outperforming the X2 in Crysis.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/HD_4870_X2/9.html



Yeah I heard the Ati cards dont work as well as the Nvidia on Crysis,I bet on other games In high res its not even close though with the X2 winning.I would be willing to give up 1 or 2 games if all the others are pristine though.


----------

