|  | | | Used and New: | | |
| All | |
| $317.00+ $8.08 *Shipping | New | | |
| $370.00+ $5.49 *Shipping | New | | |
| $398.95+ $4.82 *Shipping | New | | |
| $788.99+ $5.49 *Shipping | Used
- Mint | | |
| New | |
| $317.00+ $8.08 *Shipping | New | | |
| $370.00+ $5.49 *Shipping | New | | |
| $398.95+ $4.82 *Shipping | New | | |
| Used | |
| $788.99+ $5.49 *Shipping | Used
- Mint | | |
| | Customer Reviews: | | | Average Customer Review: ( 13 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
27 of 28 found the following review helpful:
 The Intel Core-2 Quad 9450 - Great Performance at a Price Jun 17, 2008
By Mark
"Technology, Music and Movies"
I've been building a number of systems lately, and needed to put together a few of my own too. So in addition to building several servers based on newer Xeon chips, I also have had the pleasure of building two core 2 quad systems recently.
Intel's entire lineup of new chips have some real positives. The Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Quad-Core Processor, 2.66 GHz, 12M L2 Cache, 1333MHz FSB, LGA775 is a great chip in particular that offers you some of the benefits of a server CPU at a home PC price point. It's also very compatible with the types of boards and set-ups that most gamers or heavy application users (read Photoshop :) ) will want in their rigs.
Like the Xeon Quad-core - X3350, the 9450 also gives you the 12 MB of L2 Cache, which is the largest easily available through retail channels and 50% larger than the 6600. True, for $200 you can get the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 here on Amazon. It has a very similar clock speed (easily over-clocked) and a respectable 8 MB of L2 cache, which is nothing to sneeze at. Like I said, I used that guy in my personal box, but I did find that it was possible to locate the 9450 at a similar price. So while Amazon's price does vary, if you do your research you can get the larger cache and slightly faster clock speed of the 9450 for the same price as the 6600.
People building a home server that is pulling multiple duties or running multi-threading apps like Adobe Photoshop CS3 will benefit from the extra cores. Not to mention, if you have gotten away from 32 bit OS and moved to 64 bit (Either Vista x64, Linux, Solaris, Suse, or another one) you will definitely be able to squeeze some extra juice out of the extra hardware.
Unlike the Xeon, this guy isn't compatible with the 3200 board architecture that gives you ECC DDR2 800 ram and some other extras. So while that makes the Xeon better for server specific applications, the 9450 is definitely comparable in performance for all other functions.
The LGA775 architecture is somewhat standard for Intel's core-2 quads. You get support for a 1333 FSB. Once again, with a 64 bit OS you get to take advantage of much more RAM too.
If you are a home user or are building a workstation, it may make sense to go down to the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600. But if you have a system running processor intensive functions, the extra cache of the 9450 can come in handy. Similarly, if you do your homework you can get it for about what the 6600 will set you back.
Check it out and do your research before you decide.
Enjoy.
6 of 6 found the following review helpful:
Great value. Aug 08, 2008
By M. Wang
Q9450 comes with impressive specs, but real-life performance often does not scale well with the numbers on paper. This is not the case with this thoroughly modern processor, though. It breezes through the tough video application at 30% CPU utilization, the same application that had brought the low-end dual-core it replaces to the knees.
What pleases me the most, however, is how cool this CPU runs. I had intended to make this computer as quiet as reasonably possible. Therefore, both the CPU and the GPU had to be passively cooled. I got a big heatsink (Scythe "NINJA 2" 6Heat Pipes CPU Cooler) for this purpose and it turned out to be an overkill. The CPU barely registers a little warmth even after heavy lifting. It is in fact not any hotter than the chipset. In contrast, the GeForce 8800GT, which is rated as the most energy-efficient GPU among the latest generation, feels like hot enough to fry an egg.
Given that Nehalem "Core i7" is just around the corner, the days of LGA775 are literally numbered. The upgrade path will end with the $1400 QX9770, which is exactly the same processor as Q9450 but with a 20% frequency bump. Such a frequency difference is usually inconsequential in real performance, not to mention the 55% extra heat and noise associated. So, Q9450 may well be one of the best LGA775 CPUs ever for all eternity, although Intel just released the new E0 stepping of Q9550 in August, 2008. Q9550 is over-clocked 6% over Q9450, which is a very minor difference. But the pricing on Q9550 has also been lowered from $530 to $320, so maybe it makes sense to buy that now. I don't regret getting the Q9450 though.
5 of 6 found the following review helpful:
Power on tap! Aug 11, 2008
By Gordon Ewasiuk
There is something eminently satisfying about seeing FOUR cores listed during BIOS POST. TWELVE Megabytes of L2 cache? Fast, fast, fast.
Installation was slightly annoying though. The processor/heatsink attaches to the motherboard with some plastic thumbscrew rubbish. It requires a specific order to press and turn the thumbscrews. Removal of the heatsink requires a bizarre turning, lifting, then turning combination of movements. It made me long for the days of using actual METAL screws to attach heatsinks to motherboards.
Also, the thermal paste appears to discharge onto the cpu after the first plastic thumbscrew is turned so be careful. Get it right the first time or plan on cleaning up the paste and possibly adding additional paste.
Am very happy with the CPU. Am not happy with the heatsink design.
3 of 4 found the following review helpful:
Good and Solid May 28, 2008
By Michael S. Snyder
"Thedoctor"
About 2 weeks ago i had ordered this processor and have it installed was running a dual core processor from 2005. Insteading of paying a huge amount for the qx9650 was able to get this chip overclocked to 3.3 gig, as for gaming use. Yes it does make a difference that all depends on which game you are running. Example and case in the newly released Age of Conan, Running this the game is running smooth and clean. Would have gotten the q9550 didnt want to spend the extra money. Is the chip a little pricey yes, it just got released
3 of 4 found the following review helpful:
Best Intel quad core price-performance. Throw out the fan though. Aug 14, 2008
By J. Elkins
First off, this processor is undoubtedly the best deal out there among the Intel quad-cores. Compared to the Q9550 at $570 and the QX9650 at $1000 or more, this CPU is a certified bargain. It has all of the features of those others (at least as far as I know) but just runs a touch slower (2.66 GHz instead of 2.8 or 3.0 GHz.) I wouldn't pay more for one of the other quad-cores unless you insist on having the fastest thing out there. There are other places in your system to spend your money where you'll get more performance for your dollar.
As much as I like the CPU, however, it would be a shame to install it with the terrible stock fan included in the box. Installation was a pain (the flimsy plastic pins kept popping out of the holes in my motherboard) and it is noisy and relatively ineffective at maintaining temperatures. Take some of that money you saved by opting for this CPU instead of a higher model quad core, and buy a quality CPU cooler separately. Your system will run quieter and cooler.
In short, put this (and an aftermarket CPU cooler) on your short list if you're building a system.
See all 13 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
| | |
|
* Estimated shipping rate for US 48 states. Final rate calculated at checkout. |
