Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400

Zitat: Pros: + Znakomita wydajność zwłaszcza w aplikacjach wykorzystujących wszystkie rdzenie procesora + Rozsądna jak na układ czterordzeniowy cena Cons: - Standardowy układ chłodzenia zbyt mało wydajny przy mocnym overclockingu

Zitat: Pros: + Performance Vs. Price Ratio + Not Much Heat Is Produced + Lower Power Consumption + 45nm Architecture + Good Overclocker Cons: - Does Not Like Too Much Voltage - Only 6MB L2 Cache While I was initally skeptical that the Q9400 would perform better than the Q6600, after running some benchmarks I was proven wrong. One reason was the lower L2 Cache size of the Q9400. I also believed that the Q9400 will perform poorly in overclocked conditions. This was not the case, however. While the current Q6600 I owned had a 3.6GHz limit, the Q9400 was able to surpass the Q6600 by 240Mhz on each core, resulting in a total overclocking yield of 3.84GHz per core. Many say that with the Q6600—especially the G0 stepping versions—Intel finally mastered overclocking. For some reason, however, the Q9400 one-upped its retail counterpart in the overclocking arena. Despite the fact that the Q9400 did not top all of the tests, it´s still well worth the money. For instance, if asked to choose between a 65nm Quad-Core or go with a 45nm Quad-Core, most consumers last year would have chosen the 65nm chip due to its supposedly higher overclocking performance. What most consumers do not take into account, however, is the 45nm processor´s higher performance in everyday computing. It is worth noting, though, that a year ago, 45nm CPUs cost substantially more than 65nm chips. Another benefit is that the Q9400 had over the Q6600 was lower power consumption and heat production even in overclocked settings. The AMD Phenom X4 9350e processor, on the other hand, is ridiculously overpriced for its level of performance. While it is a 65W TDP, the chip exceeds the price vs. performance ratio so much that in some cases the Q9400 performed 2x-4x better than the 9350e, even though they are in the same price range. Considering that the Q6600 only had the SSE3 instruction set extension with all older versions, the Q9400 with the new SSE4.1 Instruction Set Extension tremendously improved overall performance in our benchmarks. The Q9400 running at 2.66Ghz and 1.2v should be a perfect Quad-Core processor for any gamer or multi-processing guru. The Q9400 especially improves the performance of 3D rendering and Film/Video editing software. These types of software take advantage of multi-core processors, which is why they show a large leap in performance over lower Dual-Core models. This processor is excellent not only for gamers, but also for overclockers. As we have seen, this CPU runs stable up to 3.84Ghz at 1.4125V. Intel hit the spot once again with the Core 2 Quad Q9400 processor.

Zitat: Points forts: - Quad-core oblige : bonnes performances dans les applications audio / vidéo / 3D - Reste assez performant dans les applications non optimisées quad-core Points faibles: - Consommation dans l´absolu Comme tous les processeurs à quatre cœurs, le Q9400 se destine essentiellement aux personnes utilisant fréquemment des logiciels d´édition vidéo, photo ou 3D. Pour les autres, l´intérêt est plus limité.