Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 - The 45nm Era Begins

Rob Williams · 10-28-2007, 11:59 PM

Intel will be launching their first 45nm desktop processor in a few weeks, but we have an in-depth look for you here today. Penryn brings improved efficiency, new high-k metal gate transistors, additional cache and something that will make multimedia buffs rejoice: SSE4. Welcome to the 45nm era!

You can read the full review here and discuss it here.

NicePants42 · 10-29-2007, 03:28 PM

*Looks for overclocking results*

Merlin · 10-29-2007, 11:22 PM

The Q6850 ( 266.00 ) is so close to the Q9650 ( 1 arm, 1Leg )( both at 130 watts ).
L2 cache at 4 mb And the Q9650 at 6mb.
Hardly any increase for the price difference, that I can see.
just my 2 cents

Merlin

Rob Williams · 10-30-2007, 01:14 AM

Overclocking was left out due to time constraints (not Intel's fault).

Merlin: I agree that the QX9650 might not look that impressive, but where video encoding is concerned, it's incredible. I believe that the dual-core offerings will prove even more impressive once released, $ for $.

11-06-2007, 08:53 PM

Well if you go >4ghz on air this WILL have effect on gaming.

11-08-2007, 11:12 AM

Thanks for the extensive review and testing.

Looks like power economy and SSE4 are pretty much the only factors that differ between the two chips (QX9650 vs. QX6850), with a minor increase in some apps.

Seeing as SSE4-supported programs are currently scant (other than DivX) and that it looks like it'll stay that way for the near future I think I'll stick to QX6850 for the time being.

Roll on Nehalem! (Which should be fun!)

Cheers.

Merlin · 11-08-2007, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Well if you go >4ghz on air this WILL have effect on gaming.

4 Ghz was not stable for long, it woud fry after a week or two
But.....It was achieved

Merlin

03-22-2008, 01:06 AM

I just stumbled upon this review and while it is somewhat informative it raises another question.

The benchmarks all show the E6750 CPU at 2.4GHz while in reality the native clock frequency of this CPU is 2.66GHz. So which was it tested at, 2.4GHz or 2.66GHz? Was an E6750 tested and under-clocked or an E6600 tested and incorrectly denoted? It does make a difference.

It would have been nice to see how the E6850 at its native 3.0GHz clock stacks up against these 3.0GHz Core2Quad's. One has to wonder how significant the benefit would be going with a Core2Quad over a Core2duo of the same frequency.

Just wondering...

Rob Williams · 03-23-2008, 01:22 AM

That's an unfortunate typo... I would never run over or underclocked processors for our performance benchmarks unless explicitly stated (the only case would be comparing overclocked results to stock).

I don't have an E6850 on hand, which is why it wasn't used in the review. There won't be major speed differences unless using multi-threaded applications or want better multi-tasking. Clock for clock, single-threaded applications would perform identically.

Perhaps our most recent CPU review will have better results for you:

http://techgage.com/article/intel_co...dale_arrives/4

Merlin · 11-05-2008, 05:59 PM

Thinking about getting this one at 539.xx
Unless there is something about to come out that's better.

Any suggestions on a mobo to sadlle it up to?
maybe a ASUS P5E LGA 775 Intel X38 at 199.xx
Merlin
( third machine for this year )....maybe

10-28-2007, 11:59 PM	#1
Rob Williams Editor-in-Chief Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Atlantic Canada Posts: 13,231	Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 - The 45nm Era Begins Intel will be launching their first 45nm desktop processor in a few weeks, but we have an in-depth look for you here today. Penryn brings improved efficiency, new high-k metal gate transistors, additional cache and something that will make multimedia buffs rejoice: SSE4. Welcome to the 45nm era! You can read the full review here and discuss it here. __________________ Intel Core i7-990X EE @ 3.43GHz, GIGABYTE X58A-UD5, Kingston 12GB DDR3-1333, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 2GB Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD, WD VR 1TB, WD 2TB, Seagate 2TB, LG BD-ROM, ASUS DVD-RW, Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H60 Cooler Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.10, 3.7 Kernel) "Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter <Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.

10-29-2007, 11:22 PM	#3
Merlin The Tech Wizard Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lakeland, Fl Posts: 1,855	The Q6850 ( 266.00 ) is so close to the Q9650 ( 1 arm, 1Leg )( both at 130 watts ). L2 cache at 4 mb And the Q9650 at 6mb. Hardly any increase for the price difference, that I can see. just my 2 cents Merlin __________________ Win7 64 bit Intel i7 920 watercooled Asus P6X580 Premium mobo, GTX280 GPU watercooled Synology NAS 207 Network Server with 2 Hitachi Terabite drives LG NAS N2R1 with 2 ea 2 tb drives LINKSYS PLK300 Powerline Network Kit Last edited by Merlin; 10-29-2007 at 11:24 PM.

10-30-2007, 01:14 AM	#4
Rob Williams Editor-in-Chief Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Atlantic Canada Posts: 13,231	Overclocking was left out due to time constraints (not Intel's fault). Merlin: I agree that the QX9650 might not look that impressive, but where video encoding is concerned, it's incredible. I believe that the dual-core offerings will prove even more impressive once released, $ for $. __________________ Intel Core i7-990X EE @ 3.43GHz, GIGABYTE X58A-UD5, Kingston 12GB DDR3-1333, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 2GB Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD, WD VR 1TB, WD 2TB, Seagate 2TB, LG BD-ROM, ASUS DVD-RW, Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H60 Cooler Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.10, 3.7 Kernel) "Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter <Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.

03-22-2008, 01:06 AM	#8
Unregistered Guest Poster Posts: n/a	are the benchmark results correct? I just stumbled upon this review and while it is somewhat informative it raises another question. The benchmarks all show the E6750 CPU at 2.4GHz while in reality the native clock frequency of this CPU is 2.66GHz. So which was it tested at, 2.4GHz or 2.66GHz? Was an E6750 tested and under-clocked or an E6600 tested and incorrectly denoted? It does make a difference. It would have been nice to see how the E6850 at its native 3.0GHz clock stacks up against these 3.0GHz Core2Quad's. One has to wonder how significant the benefit would be going with a Core2Quad over a Core2duo of the same frequency. Just wondering...

03-23-2008, 01:22 AM	#9
Rob Williams Editor-in-Chief Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Atlantic Canada Posts: 13,231	That's an unfortunate typo... I would never run over or underclocked processors for our performance benchmarks unless explicitly stated (the only case would be comparing overclocked results to stock). I don't have an E6850 on hand, which is why it wasn't used in the review. There won't be major speed differences unless using multi-threaded applications or want better multi-tasking. Clock for clock, single-threaded applications would perform identically. Perhaps our most recent CPU review will have better results for you: http://techgage.com/article/intel_co...dale_arrives/4 __________________ Intel Core i7-990X EE @ 3.43GHz, GIGABYTE X58A-UD5, Kingston 12GB DDR3-1333, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 2GB Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD, WD VR 1TB, WD 2TB, Seagate 2TB, LG BD-ROM, ASUS DVD-RW, Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H60 Cooler Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.10, 3.7 Kernel) "Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter <Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.

10-29-2007, 03:28 PM	#2
NicePants42 Partition Master Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 369	Looks for overclocking results

11-06-2007, 08:53 PM	#5
Unregistered Guest Poster Posts: n/a	Well if you go >4ghz on air this WILL have effect on gaming.

11-08-2007, 11:12 AM	#6
Timo Guest Poster Posts: n/a	Thanks for the extensive review and testing. Looks like power economy and SSE4 are pretty much the only factors that differ between the two chips (QX9650 vs. QX6850), with a minor increase in some apps. Seeing as SSE4-supported programs are currently scant (other than DivX) and that it looks like it'll stay that way for the near future I think I'll stick to QX6850 for the time being. Roll on Nehalem! (Which should be fun!) Cheers.

11-05-2008, 05:59 PM	#10
Merlin The Tech Wizard Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lakeland, Fl Posts: 1,855	Q9650 Prices Thinking about getting this one at 539.xx Unless there is something about to come out that's better. Any suggestions on a mobo to sadlle it up to? maybe a ASUS P5E LGA 775 Intel X38 at 199.xx Merlin ( third machine for this year )....maybe __________________ Win7 64 bit Intel i7 920 watercooled Asus P6X580 Premium mobo, GTX280 GPU watercooled Synology NAS 207 Network Server with 2 Hitachi Terabite drives LG NAS N2R1 with 2 ea 2 tb drives LINKSYS PLK300 Powerline Network Kit Last edited by Merlin; 11-05-2008 at 06:10 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition Review	Rob Williams	Reviews and Articles	4	11-28-2011 04:21 PM
Intel Core i7-975 Extreme Edition	Rob Williams	Reviews and Articles	11	06-10-2009 07:26 AM
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Performance Preview	Rob Williams	Reviews and Articles	3	03-29-2008 08:06 PM
IDF 07 SF: Skulltrail, QX9650, 45nm Performance Preview	Rob Williams	Reviews and Articles	2	09-20-2007 11:40 PM
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 Quad-Core	Rob Williams	Reviews and Articles	5	07-28-2007 11:40 AM