Benchmarks Q9550 VS i7/Q9550 Vs AMD

[stevo]

Been doing some testing and comparing my cpu with other cpus around the same prices, AMD are sold cheaper

my cpu is Q9550 12MB L2 cache OC @ 3.4 GHZ running stable with pretty much same temps as before scores over a 1000 points better then stock



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

My CPU(Q9550) is OC @ 3.4 GHZ VS Stock I7 930 @ 2.80GHZ VS VS Q9550 OC @ 3.7GHZ
you can see even though my CPU is alot older it can keep up with some newer i7 reason for another Q9550 benchmark in there is to show it can be OC even more, even though you could prob OC the i7 and it will be quicker obviously



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

my cpu(Q9550) OC @ 3.4GHZ VS AMD 1090T @ 3.1GHZ VS AMD 1050T @ 2.8GHZ
you can see my cpu score about the same as a stock 6 core AMD 1050T, and the 1090T is a little faster. I didnt show any OC 6 core amds but I gotta admit they might have more potential the scores increase alot for them while OC

 

[Joe Momma]

The AMD 6 core chips hit around 4GHZ when overclocked. 4 core chips hit around 4.2-.43

 

[stevo]

Depends on the motherboard and what kind of cooling you have. I'm gonna try to push more out of mine in the next few days then run tests on it. Some guys run Prime95 for 24 hours to make sure its stable

 

[BluBirD78]

Well for me, for whatever reason it always seemed like when I would overclock my cpu it would actually slow down the computer, not sure why. I did several different things like adjusting voltages and things, but when I would set everything back to stock it seemed to run more smoothly and quicker too, so I just put my shit back on stock and leaved it there lol.

I like the idea of overclocking but it doesn't seem to work for me too well, so I basically gave up on it and left it at stock.

 

[Joe Momma]

Well for me, for whatever reason it always seemed like when I would overclock my cpu it would actually slow down the computer, not sure why. I did several different things like adjusting voltages and things, but when I would set everything back to stock it seemed to run more smoothly and quicker too, so I just put my shit back on stock and leaved it there lol.

I like the idea of overclocking but it doesn't seem to work for me too well, so I basically gave up on it and left it at stock.

Sounds like the voltage is very very low on your cpu. Either that or intel speedstep is buggy on your chip.

Also the reason why the Q9550 was keeping up was because it was 12MB of cache, even an aging core with tons of cache will go faster and be able to keep up with the 2009 intel i7

 

[BluBirD78]

Well I have a Q8400 for one (didn't know if u was implying that I had a Q9550), and two I disabled speedstep from what I've read on the internet, that your suppose to do that anyways. CpuZ showed it at the overclocked speed, but it just didn't perform like I had thought, anyways I got me an SSD that suppose to be here tomorrow so I'll be busy, for sure!

 

[Pugsport]

AMD cpu's work a little better for gaming but Intel cpu's work better with heavy loads

 

[Joe Momma]

Actually AMD cpu's are just cheaper and get the job done for a decent price while Intel gets it done a lot faster for a lot more money

 

[MasterCLiP]

So I should buy the......AMD CPU? lol sorry but if a guy at best buy told me this I'd shit my pants.

 

[stevo]

if you plan on saving money then yea go AMD, cant really beat the price of thos amd 6 cores lol

 

[Joe Momma]

Honestly with the way things are atm, amd isn't giving you the best bang for your buck. The dual core sandy bridge processor now outperforms the quad core phenom II chips and it's about the same price. Until bulldozer comes out, amd is going to go down the crapper in this market. Bulldozer is due in september, we will see how this goes.