Q9550 on Stock cooling

I have been testing this chip the last 2 days. I'm using a stock Intel HSF for now. Asus Maximus Formula SE 401 bios. 505 wont post with this chip. I'm also stuck on the 8 multi. Not the 8.5 this chip is rated at. So. 2.66 instead of 2.83. Some stock benchmarks:

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/intel/Q9550.jpg

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/intel/Q9550PI.jpg

13k in 3Dmark 06 with an 8800GTX:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3521247

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/intel/Q9550_winrar.jpg

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/int...draMM_test.jpg

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/intel/cinebench.jpg

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/int...arMC_Stock.jpg

After a little bit of tweaking in the bios:

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/intel/12_5.jpg

This chip is looking promising.

Looks promising indeed.

What are your temps on the stock cooling @ 3.6

It was about 39c In bios (room is 17c). Coretemp and Speedfan don't work with this chip. Asus AI suite went pear shaped when I started overclocking. So I don't know the windows temp, or load temp. The Asus Maximus Formula started to clock backwards above 450fsb. :s So I have a bit of work to do.

I don't think its the CPU that's not posting at that FSB. I think its your board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoW]8(0)

I don't think its the CPU that's not posting at that FSB. I think its your board.

---

I have the same feeling. increasing vnb didn't help at all, weescott ?

good result so far anyway :)

voltage didnt help at all. NB, SB, PLL, CPU...

It's seems totally stable at 448FSB, 450 was flakey, 451 was lucky, 452 downclocked.

I'm going to try ans source the loan of a P35 board to try it on. I have another Bonetrail board on its way too since the first one was DOA.

? 550Mhz FSB? Why the huge jumps?

oops. typo.

That's pretty good. I have my eyes feasted on the Q9450, however, rumored $316 for 12MB of Cache and 2.66 Ghz chocolatty goodness for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weescott

I have been testing this chip the last 2 days. I'm using a stock Intel HSF for now. Asus Maximus Formula SE 401 bios. 505 wont post with this chip. I'm also stuck on the 8 multi. Not the 8.5 this chip is rated at. So. 2.66 instead of 2.83. Some stock benchmarks:

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/intel/Q9550.jpg

---

no 8.5x multi is most likely a bios problem

Dude, could you run the Crysis demo to see if SSE4.1 improves the gameplay (so long as you have a decent gfx card)

Very nice CPU a great performance.
I see that it's a newer revision, can you please try Core Temp 0.95.4 and see if you get readings that are not 126C please?
The older revisions didn't really work properly with Core Temp

Not Coretemp, speedfan or TAT work with this chip. Even the Asus AI suite doesnt work properly, but I finally got some believable readouts from Sisoft Sandra:

Asus Maximus Formula has a bit of Vdrop and Vdroop.

1.34375v bios, 1.32v windows, 1.3v for 3584Ghz Orthos (quick test) 67c load. Room temperature of 20c.

I'll wait till I get a new motherboard to test more. I'll download the Cryis Demo later on too (8800GTX). :up:

Nice and all but what's the max of this CPU?

1.376Vcore isn't exactly pushing it, is it?

This is Xtreme Systems after all. :)

If you look at the posts above you will see I am stuck on 450FSB and awaiting a new motherboard.

My phase unit is sitting in the corner waiting patiently. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weescott

If you look at the posts above you will see I am stuck on 450FSB and awaiting a new motherboard.

My phase unit is sitting in the corner waiting patiently. ;)

---

What is the board capable of with another CPU then FSB wise?

I find it hard to believe a Maximus mobo tops out at 450MHz tbh.

If it's a CPU FSB wall this chip is rather bad despite it's very nice clock for clock performance.

You have to remember that this is a C2Q and not a C2D. Boards running a C2Q will top out their FSBs much lower than on a C2D.

@weescott - do you think you can benchmark this chip using my x264 benchmark? We currently only have data on an overclocked Q9350 ES... I'd love to see this chip @ stock settings and at any o/c settings you are willing to try.

Thanks dude!

The new chips are now using .5 increments for the Multi? I thought this was only an AMD thing?

Either way, .5 multis are pointless IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by graysky

@weescott - do you think you can benchmark this chip using my x264 benchmark? We currently only have data on an overclocked Q9350 ES... I'd love to see this chip @ stock settings and at any o/c settings you are willing to try.

Thanks dude!

---

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...6&postcount=40

Stock setting. Overclocked on its way. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoW]8(0)

You have to remember that this is a C2Q and not a C2D. Boards running a C2Q will top out their FSBs much lower than on a C2D.

---

That's with Kentsfields, we don't know yet if this holds truth for Yorky's, do we?

I would be rather dissapointed if i payed an arm and a leg for such a chip and i couldn't get higher than this, wouldn't you?

correct me if i am wrong but a 9550 won't "cost you an arm and a leg";)...just about a half leg...LOL:D...what, $530?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace-a-Rue

correct me if i am wrong but a 9550 won't "cost you an arm and a leg";)...just about a half leg...LOL:D...what, $530?

---

I'd rather play safe and spend a kidney on a QX9650. :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weescott

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...6&postcount=40

Stock setting. Overclocked on its way. :cool:

---

Thanks dude.

A quick upate. The new Asus Maximus Formula 602 bios supports the half multi. I still can't get past 450fsb though. :(

http://www.weescott.co.uk/images/intel/3825.jpg

Nice OC, I hope these get released before X-Mas

I'm starting to wondering now if it would be worth buying a Q6600 G0 now for about 285$ with a 9 multi or wait and buy a Q9450 for about 350$ and with a multi of 8...

It's seems about equal performance cuz if the Q6600 reach lets say 3,8 Ghz and the Q9450 reach about 3,3 or 3,4 Ghz because of the lower multi if the performance will be better... and for about 80$ more

I'm finding this quad is between 2 and 500mhz quicker than the Q6600 depending on the test. I also managed to run it at stock with 1.07v and passive water cooling. PA120.1 and chipset waterblock. Quad Orthos stable...well 2hrs but I'm impatient. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weescott

I'm finding this quad is between 2 and 500mhz quicker than the Q6600 depending on the test. I also managed to run it at stock with 1.07v and passive water cooling. PA120.1 and chipset waterblock. Quad Orthos stable...well 2hrs but I'm impatient. :p

---

Hi,
If You have time can you test Q6600 at 9x450 and Q9550 at 8.5x450 let say PC Mark05, CPU test of Mark 06, Crysis CPU Bench with the same other settings to see what is the real deference between these two CPUs.
And after that with max. FSB what is possoble for these two CPUs.
I'm allso in two minds about buying of Q6600 G0, or waiting for Q9550 or Q9450?!
It will be very interesting a comparation between Q6600 and Q9450 allso.

Thank's!

Will the multipliers be locked on these bad boys? Only FSB to play with?

Yup. If you want unlocked multi's you have to shell out for the Extreme versions. I'm seeing that the regular Yorkfields are all hitting a FSB wall :/

I think it will have 8.5 on the Q9550 and 8 on the Q9450.

I think they can run beautifully but not in current mobos.

weescott any updates on bios and results?

cheers

I'll sell my Q6600 and get one of those from NewEgg.com soon. Hope it's already an E0 revision ^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viper.Br

I'll sell my Q6600 and get one of those from NewEgg.com soon. Hope it's already an E0 revision ^^

---

if it isn't doesn't even worth, so if can't get a E0 stepping forget it, keep

your kentsfield it's enough for thi Q9550.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrHydes

weescott any updates on bios and results?

cheers

---

Probably not, this thread is almost 9 months old. :rolleyes: