Help Click This Ad =)

29 February 2008

Core 2 Quad Q9300 vs Q6600 Benchmark

The Future of Mainstream:
Intel 45nm Core 2 Quad Q9300 Benchmarked





Intel's Quad-cores are entering the 45nm process era. Intel has already announced the Q9300, Q9450, Q9550 & QX9650. These Penryn based quads will replace its existing 65nm Kensfield brother. This extract of the original review, focusing mainly on gaming, will compare the performance of Q6600 with the Q9300.





CPU-Z screenshot of an overclocked Q9300 @ 3.7Ghz,
some managed to overcome the 3.5Ghz FSB wall.




Specifications Comparison


Core 2 Quad Q9300 Core 2 Quad Q6600
Codename Yorkfield Kentsfield
Frequency 2.5Ghz 2.4Ghz
Rated FSB 1333Mhz 1066Mhz
Multiplier 7.5x 9x
L2 Cache 2x 3MB 2x 4MB
Cores 4 4
Socket LGA775 LGA775
Process 45nm 65nm
TDP 95W 95W (G0) / 105W (B3)
Instruction Sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4.1 MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3
Transistor Count 2x 410million 2x 291million
Die Size 2x 107 sq mm 2x 143 sq mm
Price (1ku) $266.00 $183.00

The prices above is taken from the Intel Processor Price List (as of Nov' 08). SSE4.1 added into the 45nm part. Do note that although the transistor count has increased from 582million to 810million, but half the 12MB L2 cache on the Q9300 has been disabled.



Test System:
AMD Phenom X4 9600 (Socket AM2+, 2.3GHz, 4 x 512KB L2, 2MB L3, Agena)
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 (LGA775, 2.5GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 2 x 3MB L2, Yorkfield)
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (LGA775, 2.4GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 2 x 4MB L2, Kentsfield)
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 (LGA775, 3.16GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 6MB L2, Wolfdale)
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 (LGA775, 3.0GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 4MB L2, Conroe)

ASUS P5E3 Deluxe (LGA775, Intel X38, DDR3 SDRAM)
DFI LANParty UT 790FX-M2R (Socket AM2+, AMD 790FX)

Corsair Dominator TWIN2X2048-10000C5DF 2GB @ DDR2-1067 5-5-5-15
Cell Shock DDR3-1800 2GB @ DDR3-1333 7-7-7-20

Graphics: OCZ GeForce 8800GTX
Storage: Western Digital WD1500AHFD (SATA150)
O/S: Microsoft Windows Vista x86





A quick overall benchmark comparison between the Q9300 & Q6600.
The new 45nm part is about 7% faster.





Overclocked or not, the 45nm dual-core wins out here.





The extra 0.1Ghz + optimized architecture helps the Q9300 to edge out a victory here in Winrar.




AMD's Phenom is no match against Intel's offerings here.





Q9300 beats Q6600 slightly in 3Dmark06.




This game don't seem to be optimized for Quad-cores.




That goes for Half-Life 2, too.




The dualies beat the quads here in Crysis.
(I'm not sure whether the testers installed the v1.1 patch)




World in Conflict.




Unreal Tournament 3




Although its 0.1Ghz faster, but the 45nm manages to consume less power than the 65nm part.



Upgrading from Q6600 to Q9300 saves you another 10W during idle. Your savings may be doubled if you own a Q6600 with a B3 stepping.


Source: http://www.hardspell.com/doc/hard/67493.htm (in Chinese)


Other popular posts:

2 COMMENTS:

Cool Flame said...

q6600 with G0 is the best performace/price card.

If you just play games get the e8500 otherwise its q6600 all the way!

ruisu said...

At 17.83 cents per kWh in New York City, the Q9300 is the better value here.

The REAL cost of a kWh is 21 cents though. Based on the real cost, if I let the two CPUs idle for a year the Q6600 would cost $77 more. If I had them folding proteins or running SETI for a year, the Q6600 would cost over $126 more than the Q9300.

Q9300 wins big in New York.

eXTReMe Tracker