1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Build Advice Q9550 Update Advice

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by SazBard, 17 Mar 2014.

  1. SazBard

    SazBard 10 PRINT "C64 FTW"

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    326
    Likes Received:
    5
    Alright

    I have a Q9550 based rig clocked at around 3.7Ghz. What would be a logical update from it whilst keeping costs very low?

    I'm currently looking at an FX-6300 with an MSI 990FX MB, and 8gb 1600Ghz DDR3 RAM, but I'm feeling this is more of a sideway's step rather than a nice leap forward? :confused:

    I already have a GTX 570, and Xonar DX so will be re-using those for sure.


    Cheers.
     
  2. mrbungle

    mrbungle Undercooked chicken giver

    Joined:
    20 Sep 2004
    Posts:
    5,300
    Likes Received:
    164
    What sort of budget? OK with 2nd hand stuff?

    Id say the FX6300 is a good chip but you are coming from something that is very overclocked so maybe the returns won't be as big as youd like.

    If I was going to pick up a FX id prob get the FX8320 myself.

    Also depends on the useage, threaded apps/games will be better non threaded might not be much faster however!

    Also a 2nd hand 2500K i5 is hard to beat and there are tons of cheap z68 motherboards to stick one in :)
     
    SazBard likes this.
  3. AlienwareAndy

    AlienwareAndy New Member

    Joined:
    7 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    3,421
    Likes Received:
    70
    Yeah I would try and find the extra beans and go 8320.

    You absolutely must clock any AMD to make it worth it. That's how they come into their own, because they have lots of cores that can do mammoth clocks..

    Whatever you go for the sweet spot for performance is 4.5ghz. Anything more is a bonus...

    Any recent game will use all of the cores. Those that don't don't really matter too much IMO. IE - South Park (though I've not checked actual core use).

    Edit. Oh, and avoid anything MSI for AMD. Their boards are really, really poor on AM3+ and have been known to catch fire. Seriously, they really are that bad.

    Go for an Asus.. This one will see you right...

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/M5A99X-R2-0...=UTF8&qid=1395057645&sr=8-2&keywords=asus+990

    Asus really are the doggie's bollocks when it comes to AM3. It's like they're the only company who actually gives a rat's ass about making a half decent board for it.
     
    SazBard likes this.
  4. play_boy_2000

    play_boy_2000 It was funny when I was 12

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2004
    Posts:
    1,423
    Likes Received:
    50
    A Q9550 @ 3.7Ghz is probably going to put even modern AMD chips to shame. I'd put cash into a SSD or additional RAM at the moment. Other than that, just keep an eye on the price of DDR3 and used 2500k/3570k chips, and buy when your budget allows.
     
  5. SazBard

    SazBard 10 PRINT "C64 FTW"

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    326
    Likes Received:
    5
    Yeah I don't mind second hand, was actually going through ebay this morning, but it didn't occur to me to look at the FX8320, thanks, I'll look that up!

    WOW MSI are THAT bad? I do really want an ASUS board but that would push the price up. ASUS have been the best since forever! :D

    I though about just getting more ram because I only have 4Gb at the mo, and just keep my rig, but ya know, I'm getting the upgrade itch :naughty:


    Thanks all :rock:

    EDIT: Hmm tell me more about these SSD's, are they worth it? ~£55 for a Kingston/Crucial 120Gb drive on ebuyer, is that a good price?
    KINGSTON SSD
    CRUCIAL SSD

    I'm a bit out of the loop, sorry for all the noob question's!
     
    Last edited: 17 Mar 2014
  6. AlienwareAndy

    AlienwareAndy New Member

    Joined:
    7 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    3,421
    Likes Received:
    70
    You probably have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

    Sazbard. Please run Cinebench R15 and Asus Realbench 2.0 on your PC. They are both completely free. Then post back with your results and we'll see how your CPU stands up.
     
  7. SazBard

    SazBard 10 PRINT "C64 FTW"

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    326
    Likes Received:
    5
    I would love to but there is a slight temporary hitch, one of my 1066 ocz's went pop the other week, so I've had to use a couple of 800 1gb sticks in the other channel and so had to put my fsb down to 405 for now till I find a replacement, when I can put it back to a 440 fsb I'll do the tests. I got outbid on some Kingston sticks on fleabay by 83p the other day, argh!!!!! Lol
     
    Last edited: 18 Mar 2014
  8. AlienwareAndy

    AlienwareAndy New Member

    Joined:
    7 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    3,421
    Likes Received:
    70
    So you're using DDR2? dear lord. Just run the benchmark any way dude and post back your results. I will then gather some data to compare it to to help you in your decision..
     
  9. play_boy_2000

    play_boy_2000 It was funny when I was 12

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2004
    Posts:
    1,423
    Likes Received:
    50
    I looked back through my super PI 1M results for some comparisons; even AMDs top of the line is still crushed in superPI single threaded performance.

    E4300 (Conroe) @ 3.1Ghz 19.175s
    AMD FX-9590 @ stock (5Ghz turbo) 18.861s as per here
    E8400 @ 4Ghz 11.871s (still valid, as Q9550 is just 2 Penryn dies)

    Next, lets try a multithreaded benchmark.

    Wprime 32M (albiet not quite the same version)

    FX-9590 - 7.737s here
    Q9650 Overclocked (exact OC not specified) - 10.125s here

    Not exactly a stunning victory.

    It's tough to find common benchmarks between CPU's ~6 years apart, but I can continue looking if you want?
     
  10. Harlequin

    Harlequin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    7,071
    Likes Received:
    179
    if the OP wants to get an AMD AM3 system , then I recommend getting *at least* 1866 speed ram to match the cpu
     
  11. Yadda

    Yadda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2003
    Posts:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    49
    OP, what's limiting your current setup? When you're playing your games at your preferred settings, what runs out of juice - your CPU or your GPU? (MSI Afterburner's CPU & GPU usage graphs are good for monitoring this).

    When running a game, if your GPU's at 100% usage but the Q9550's cores are not, then you won't see much improvement from a CPU upgrade. If on the other hand, the Q9550's cores are at 100% usage and the 570 is ticking along twiddling it's thumbs then you will benefit from a new CPU.

    Some games are more GPU dependant, others more CPU dependant. Synthetic benchmarks are all well and good but to get some meaningful information to help you decide what to do, monitor how your system copes with the games you play.
     
    Last edited: 18 Mar 2014
  12. AlienwareAndy

    AlienwareAndy New Member

    Joined:
    7 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    3,421
    Likes Received:
    70
    Run Cinebench. R15. Run 3Dmark Firestrike, take note of the Physics score. Run Realbench 2.0, take note of the heavy multitasking score.

    Edit. God. You are banging on about single threaded performance, ignoring the fact that the 6300 has six cores and the 8320 has eight FFS.

    It's not 2006 any more mate.

    http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proces...cessor-Review-Vishera-Breaks-Cover/Conclusion

    There. I suggest you read that, as it's a little more with the times. I quote -

    So what do we actually get with this release? Well, it is a bittersweet release for AMD. The pricing on these parts is not only competitive, it undercuts Intel by a significant amount across the board. The 8350 is very competitive with the 3570K, and it can be had for $30 less. The 6300 will walk all over the Intel products that exist at the $132 price point, and in fact is more competitive in terms of performance with the $185 Intel products. Again, we get a nice $50 discount for essentially the same performance. In these cases though, expect the AMD CPU to consume more power. Would it be enough to make one nervous about energy bills? Not really

    If the 6300 can walk Intel products at the $132 price point (IE modern I3s) then it sure as hell will poo on a 45nm quad running DDR2.
     
  13. Yadda

    Yadda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2003
    Posts:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    49
    The old Quads get a thorough spanking in Cinebench, there's no doubt there.

    Thankfully most people just play games though, where they still pack a surprising punch when overclocked.

    Here's a roundup that compares the average performance of a Q9550 at 3.7GHz to, amongst other processors, a FX6350 at 4.5GHz with a 7970 GPU across several games (borderlands 2, Crysis 3, F1 2012, Far Cry 3, Hitman Absolution, StarCraft II: Heart Of The Swarm, Skyrim and Tomb Raider). Not the absolute cutting edge games perhaps, but a good representation of a typical gamer's collection.

    You might be surprised how well the Q9550 (at 3.7Ghz) performs for such an old dog. :)

    [​IMG]

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/piledriver-k10-cpu-overclocking,3584-19.html
     
    Last edited: 18 Mar 2014
    SazBard likes this.
  14. play_boy_2000

    play_boy_2000 It was funny when I was 12

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2004
    Posts:
    1,423
    Likes Received:
    50
    Andy, from a CPU perspective, it actually still is 2008 (not 06), just more cores and minor IPC jumps every node change. I'm not arguing that AMD has actually made some decent improvements as of late, but if you have to change platforms from an overclocked Q9550, the only way up is Intel, from a pure cost benefit analysis approach.
     
  15. AlienwareAndy

    AlienwareAndy New Member

    Joined:
    7 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    3,421
    Likes Received:
    70
    Sorry I don't agree at all.

    Cinebench R15 uses a CPU properly. Any CPU. Versions before R15 did not. Well, they did, but only on the Intels. There used to be a lot of that, in fact, many apps were coded purely for Intel.

    Battlefield 3 uses up to six cores. As such you will get the same performance out of an overclocked 6300 that you would out of an overclocked 2500k. The same will happen in any modern title because they all use lots of cores. Crysis 3 for example sees the 8320 and 8350 ahead of the 3570k by quite a margin. So no, it's not 2008 any more.

    As for cost? I can buy a 8320 and motherboard that will see it clock to 4.3ghz for less than I can buy a 4670k. And the fact is that when both CPUs are balls to the wall the 8320 is a more powerful CPU.

    Recently when Realbench 2.0 was released I had the same sort of argument that you are making here from some one who had an I7 920. I repeatedly asked this person who thought that his CPU was better than an AMD FX8 to run the benchmark. No results were posted but, I would strongly imagine he did only to find that his CPU trailed behind.

    When I said it's not 2006 any more I meant from a software perspective. My 8320 @ 4.9ghz beat a 3770k in Metro Last Light as another example.

    If I were you I would buy one and overclock it and put it to the test. Blindly going on the very vague information out there on the internet is no way to attain the facts.

    I wish I could tell you that my hexa core Intel CPU was faster than my AMD. In Cinebench I score 403 with the Intel. Now granted it's a bit derped from a clock perspective, but from the way you are carrying on about IPC and single threaded performance the Intel should murder the AMD no matter what. But even at the stock speed of 3.7ghz my AMD puts out a Cinebench score of 580 odd.

    And as time goes by more and more apps and games are using 8 cores, because they are being based on console code which uses 8 AMD cores.
     
  16. AlienwareAndy

    AlienwareAndy New Member

    Joined:
    7 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    3,421
    Likes Received:
    70
    I'm not saying it doesnt, I'm just saying that a 6300 will absolutely wipe the floor with it.

    Don't forget that most 6300s will do 5ghz, all will do at least 4.6. At those sorts of clock frequencies the AMD will absolutely obliterate the old quads.

    The 6300 is right on par with the 2500k when used properly, and that's more often than not in all of the latest titles (at least five, all the most recent).
     
  17. play_boy_2000

    play_boy_2000 It was funny when I was 12

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2004
    Posts:
    1,423
    Likes Received:
    50
    Andy, feel free to go on believing and speculating what you want, but just keep in mind that SazBard would potentially be the one laying out his/her hard earned cash. Offering your advice based solely on un-cited and arguably fanboi opinions reflects poorly on us all.

    Good day sir.
     
    SazBard likes this.
  18. bawjaws

    bawjaws Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    3,501
    Likes Received:
    378
    I don't think there's any need for that post, play_boy_2000. Everyone's entitled to air their opinions in a civilised manner, as both you and Andy have done here, so there's no need to play the "fanboi" card, especially if you're only doing so to get a rise out of someone.
     
  19. AlienwareAndy

    AlienwareAndy New Member

    Joined:
    7 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    3,421
    Likes Received:
    70
    You make me sound like a Christian.

    It's not about belief, or speculation, son. It's about facts. Fanboys offer blinkered information that negates the use of fact. However, I've posted fact. I have three rigs in my house, two of which are AMD, one of which is Intel.

    Here.

    [​IMG]

    And.

    [​IMG]

    Now run along and run those benchmarks on your Core 2 Quad. If you can even so much as sniff those scores you have a point.

    You don't seem to understand that a CPU is about the entire CPU, not just 1/8 or 1/4 of it.

    And with apps and games becoming more heavily threaded by the day your age old argument of IPC and single threaded performance becomes history.
     
  20. SazBard

    SazBard 10 PRINT "C64 FTW"

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    326
    Likes Received:
    5
    Sorry for not posting the results, don't worry I haven't run off yet! I've been really busy helping my sis-in-law with her house and have hardly been at home. Soon as I get some time I would love to run some bench's.

    Thanks all for your opinions by the way.
    :)
     

Share This Page