Average Review Score:
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Reviews
|website||score||publish date||article quality|
|CDR Info||---||Apr 14 '08|
|Hot Hardware||---||Apr 28 '08|
|LegitReviews.com||---||Apr 18 '08|
|Overclockers Club||---||Jul 21 '08|
|Tech Report||---||Apr 17 '08|
|X-bit labs||---||Feb 08 '08|
|»Submit a review link|
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Roundups and Shootouts
|Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Review||Digit-Life||--||Feb 08 '08|
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Previews
|website||publish date||article rating|
|There are currently no previews. Click below to submit one.|
|» Submit a preview link|
Quoted from Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Reviews:Check out these quotes from Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 reviews & previews
"To sum up, the Intel Q9300 is an interesting processor for users that can't do without a quad core. Many users may disagree or even prefer the Intel Q6600 that costs 15 euros less and offer more overclocking margins. Others may save 90-100 Euros and buy the Intel E8400 that will be faster in absolute terms of gaming/desktop use. As always, the final choice is yours."
"All in all, a quad-core chip which runs cool and is overclockable to over 3.3 GHz with simple air-cooling at a ~$270 price point is a product which is undeniably attractive. With more and more applications being coded with true multi-core support, along with the steep processing requirements of Windows Vista, there is no doubt that these chips will be popular. We wish Intel would have just gone with a solid 12 MB of cache across the board for this new Core 2 Quad lineup, but we certainly wont harp on this point. The Q9300 is an excellent chip and we are hard pressed to find any major fault with it."
"The Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 processor might be the entry-level 45nm quad-core processor, but the performance numbers sure doesn't suggest that!"
"If you want a 45nm quad core CPU but the price of the Q9450 and Q9550 are just out of reach, then this would be a good option to go with. Performance junkies might want to give this one a pass as 500+ FSB speeds will be needed to get to the promised land due to the low clock multiplier. If a 45nm quad is not a requirement, then the Q6600 is still a better value for your money."
"In fact, the Q9300's toughest competition may come in the form of the Core 2 Duo E8500. Are two faster cores better than four slower ones? Our benchmark results vary on that question, and software has been frustratingly slow to progress toward more threads. Still, the numbers themselves tell a story. The cores in the Q9300, at their stock speed, are more than fast enough to run today's largely single- and dual-threaded games. In applications where more threads are used, the Q9300 is often fastersometimes dramatically so. On top of that, given that pretty much all recent Penryn chips we've overclocked have topped out around 3.2GHz, I'd have a hard time going for the E8500 over the Q9300. Either is a fine choice, but look for the Q9300 to be featured prominently in our next system guide. As for the Core 2 Duo E7200, well, once it arrives, AMD will be hard pressed to sell many Athlon 64 X2 processors priced above whatever its list price turns out to be. And if most E7200s overclock to 3.16GHz on a 1333MHz bus as easily as ours did, this thing may turn out to be a new enthusiast favorite."