# E8400 vs Q9300: Gaming



## 3870x2 (Apr 22, 2008)

im upgrading my E6750 to... something.  If I do, PM me if you are interested in an e6750 for $149 SHIPPED.

What should I upgrade to? E8400 or Q9300?

6750 used for 1.5 months.


----------



## Darknova (Apr 22, 2008)

For gaming? E8400 no question. Except for SupCom, and a few other RTS's I don't know of any game that uses more than 2 cores, with the exception of the upcoming Alan Wake.

Couple that with the fact the E8400 can do 4Ghz and you've got much more gaming power than a Q9300, which I doubt will get close to 4Ghz with a much lower multi and reports of an FSB wall on all 45 quads


----------



## 3870x2 (Apr 22, 2008)

and the future? I care about tomorrow of course, but more importantly next month? july?  I wonder where support is going in the future for higher numbers of cores.


----------



## Darknova (Apr 22, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> and the future? I care about tomorrow of course, but more importantly next month? july?  I wonder where support is going in the future for higher numbers of cores.



Well, if you buy at the right time you could get an E8400 for as little as £125 (that's what I got mine for), which is much cheaper than a Q9300 and leaves room to upgrade other parts of your PC.

And the future? Well of course it will go multi-core. No doubt about it, but I personally don't think it's worth it when I can get a dual without an FSB wall that'll do 4Ghz+ when the Q9300 can't.


----------



## tzitzibp (Apr 22, 2008)

for someone who wants to change his cpu, after just 1,5 months of use, you worry too much about the future... 

my suggestion is e8400 or even e8500.... keep it for a year, while gradually ocing it 0.1ghz per month until you reach 4,2ghz,  then maybe more games will support 4 cores and you can go for it...


----------



## Darknova (Apr 22, 2008)

I've seen reports of the quads not being able to get past 480-485Mhz on the FSB, which would be a maximum of 3.63Ghz on the Q9300.

I've seen E8400s reach 4.2Ghz easily...


----------



## tzitzibp (Apr 22, 2008)

I agree.... i set an e8400 to run 4.05ghz with all bios settings on auto...


----------



## EnglishLion (Apr 22, 2008)

Go E8400, don't buy for the future in PC technology.  By the time the software fully supports the item that you 'bought for the future' you can usually buy a better and cheaper version of it.  Get the dual now buy a quad later.


My exception to this rule is motherboard because of the pain & hassle involved in changing it.

The Q6600 is better than the Q9300 as it overclocks further and has more cache.  If you want quad you need to shoot above the Q9300 it's significantly the runt of the latest intel quads.


----------



## 3870x2 (Apr 22, 2008)

tzitzibp said:


> for someone who wants to change his cpu, after just 1,5 months of use, you worry too much about the future...
> 
> my suggestion is e8400 or even e8500.... keep it for a year, while gradually ocing it 0.1ghz per month until you reach 4,2ghz,  then maybe more games will support 4 cores and you can go for it...



I decided to upgrade to a slightly better proc, and asked for others opinions, not your criticism.

The e8500 is double the price of the 8400, yet it only has .16ghz more? is there any other difference?


----------



## will (Apr 22, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> I decided to upgrade to a slightly better proc, and asked for others opinions, not your criticism.
> 
> The e8500 is double the price of the 8400, yet it only has .16ghz more? is there any other difference?



There is no difference other than the 8.5x multi (vs 8x on the e8400), equal to .16GHz at stock, obviously more when overclocked, tbh really isnt worth it considering how much more it costs.


----------



## PaulieG (Apr 22, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> I decided to upgrade to a slightly better proc, and asked for others opinions, not your criticism.
> 
> The e8500 is double the price of the 8400, yet it only has .16ghz more? is there any other difference?



Not really, especially if you overclock. The e8500 does not give much extra head room. As for q9300 vs. e8400, no question the e8400 is the better value right now. q6600 vs. e8400 is the better argument right now, due to the small difference in price.


----------



## tzitzibp (Apr 22, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> I decided to upgrade to a slightly better proc, and asked for others opinions, not your criticism.
> 
> The e8500 is double the price of the 8400, yet it only has .16ghz more? is there any other difference?



i was only joking, friend.... honest!

the e8400 is 333fsb x 9 multi @ 3.0ghz with a price of 170 euro@ 245$
the e8500 is 333fsb x 9.5 multi@3,16ghz with the price of 230euro@ 333$

the difference is 35%... 

however the q9300 is 333fsb x 7.5 multi@2.5ghz and is also priced at 333$ so your best bet is the e8400, both in terms of value and gaming power... 

Hope I helped!


----------



## spearman914 (Apr 22, 2008)

E8400 is the best for overclocking should reach 4 GHz on just 0.05 extra volts on air. If you want some decent results on gaming and benchmarking I suggest you get the Q9300. Games will start to support it dunno when... soon... soon...


----------



## Nitro-Max (Apr 22, 2008)

E8400 the future could be a long way off.


----------



## will (Apr 22, 2008)

Oh yeah sorry I did mean 9.5x and 9x! Just came out wrong!


----------



## HTC (Apr 22, 2008)

Have you considered the E3110? From what i've read, it's as good if not better then the E8400.

Ask around, dude!


----------



## trog100 (Apr 22, 2008)

i changed from a 6750 at 3.6 gig 24/7 to a 8400 just cos i wanted 4 gig 24/7..

4 gig being a "desirable" figure.. he he

i cant say as i notice any gaming improvement thow.. in fact there isnt any.. i just made the move to get 4 gig.. 

but for what its worth my 6750 chip topped out at 3.9 gig.. my 8400 tops out at 4.5 gig.. only of use for higher benching scores thow definitely not needed for games..

a slower quad will be theoretically worse for games but to be honest once u get over 3 gig its all overkill and purely grafix card limited.. 

trog


----------



## 3870x2 (Apr 23, 2008)

HTC said:


> Have you considered the E3110? From what i've read, it's as good if not better then the E8400.
> 
> Ask around, dude!



How is it better?
Also, I think a more valid argument would be the Q9450vsE8400, even though the 9450 is more expensive.
Im looking to get one of the best processors without spending more than $350.


----------



## HTC (Apr 23, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> How is it better?
> Also, I think a more valid argument would be the Q9450vsE8400, even though the 9450 is more expensive.
> Im looking to get one of the best processors without spending more than $350.



Lower volts to reach the same OC speed. Try searching for E3110 related articles: that should give you a better idea.


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

what chipset is your motherboard if you can get 500fsb which most p35 boards can do get a e8200 most of the time they will match a e8400 and save you money and what country so we know where to tell you to buy. These are the best options

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115027 Q6700 will matches both quads you mentioned for less money.

http://clubit.com/product_detail.cfm?itemno=CA1938470


----------



## will (Apr 23, 2008)

trt740 said:


> what chipset is your motherboard if you can get 500fsb which most p35 boards can do get a e8200 most of the time they will match a e8400 and save you money and what country so we know where to tell you to buy. These are the best options
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115027 Q6700 will matches both quads you mentioned for less money.
> 
> http://clubit.com/product_detail.cfm?itemno=CA1938470



surely if his mobo can do 500fsb with the e8200, it can with the e8400, so giving him a higher speed... or are you saying that most e8400s cant get to that speed anyway?


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

will said:


> surely if his mobo can do 500fsb with the e8200, it can with the e8400, so giving him a higher speed... or are you saying that most e8400s cant get to that speed anyway?



no most e8400 will hit a top speed on air of 4.0ghz to 4.3ghz 24/7 stable.  Most e8200 on newer motherboards can hit  4.0ghz to 4.2ghz on air . There is about a 40.00 to 70.00 difference in price depending on where you buy the chip saving him some money.To answer your second question I have owned 6 wofdales  2 E8400, 3 E3110, and a E8500 and the E8500 was the worst of the 6 overclockers. The e8400 and E3110 chips all seemed to like the X8 multiplers best for overclocking in the three different motherboards and several chips wouldn't do more than 4.05ghz  24/7, one e8400 would only do 3.85ghz. So yes I'm saying most e8400 won't go all that much higher 24/7, not benching, than e8200 chips In P35 and X38/48 and 790 boards. My current e3110 is an exception and is the best of the 6 chips I have owned.


----------



## HTC (Apr 23, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> How is it better?
> Also, I think a more valid argument would be the Q9450vsE8400, even though the 9450 is more expensive.
> Im looking to get one of the best processors without spending more than $350.



According to Freaksavior's post, an E3110 ranks 1st in 3d06 for dual core 1 single 3870 card:

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=48426


----------



## erocker (Apr 23, 2008)

If you can find one, the recently released E8300 seems to be a good bargain.


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

HTC said:


> According to Freaksavior's post, an E3110 ranks 1st in 3d06 for dual core 1 single 3870 card:
> 
> http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=48426



That may only be a benching speed not a stable 24/7 clock look in super PI I have one fastest e8400 and it was not my best 24/7 stable chip but it would bench very high. Super pi is all cpu 3dmarks 06 is not. Of all the  chips I have owned xeon and core 2 duo alike the E3110s don't seem to be better binned. They perform almost exactly as E8400s and use the same voltage. On These xeons Intel is full of crap. I'm not sure how they don't get sued. As Asus should over the Ramage / maximus B.S. Aswell as DFI


----------



## calvary1980 (Apr 23, 2008)

e8400 has a multiplier of 9 not 8.

4000 Mhz / 9 = *444 FSB*, 444 FSB x 2 = *888 Mhz Memory*

this is what is required to run at 4 Ghz.

- Christine


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

calvary1980 said:


> e8400 has a multiplier of 9 not 8.
> 
> 4000 Mhz / 9 = *444 FSB*, 444 FSB x 2 = *888 Mhz Memory*
> 
> ...



yes I know that but the chips I owned overclocked higher using a X8  than x9 and even X9.5 with the E8500. They were more stable and with a higher FSB the entire system is faster. 500x8+4.0ghz > 450x9+4.0ghz. Or my current chip 531x8.0 3.6v


----------



## will (Apr 23, 2008)

trt740 said:


> no most e8400 will hit a top speed on air of 4.0ghz to 4.3ghz 24/7 stable.  Most e8200 on newer motherboards can hit  4.0ghz to 4.2ghz on air . There is about a 40.00 to 70.00 difference in price depending on where you buy the chip saving him some money.To answer your second question I have owned 6 wofdales  2 E8400, 3 E3110, and a E8500 and the E8500 was the worst of the 6 overclockers. The e8400 and E3110 chips all seemed to like the X8 multiplers best for overclocking in the three different motherboards and several chips wouldn't do more than 4.05ghz  24/7, one e8400 would only do 3.85ghz. So yes I'm saying most e8400 won't go all that much higher 24/7, not benching, than e8200 chips In P35 and X38/48 and 790 boards. My current e3110 is an exception and is the best of the 6 chips I have owned.



cool, my e8400 isnt that great, it needs 1.425v just to get to 4ghz, dont really know what safe 24/7 voltage is for these chips, im guessing about 1.4v... im hoping it will need less once i flash my board to rampage! just need a memory stick...


----------



## HTC (Apr 23, 2008)

trt740 said:


> that may only be a benching speed not a stable 24/7 clock look in super PI I have one fastest e8400 and it was not my best 24/7 stable chip but it would bench very high. Super pi is all cpu 3dmarks 06 is not. Of all the  chips I have owned xeon and core 2 duo alike the E3110s don't seem to be better binned. They perform almost exactly as E8400s and use the same voltage. On These xeons Intel is full of crap.



Probably right, but i would also say the same of the E8400 on that list.

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=53180&highlight=e3110

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=58249&highlight=e3110

The above 2 links have reference of E3110.


----------



## calvary1980 (Apr 23, 2008)

trt740 said:


> yes I know that but the chips I owned overclocked higher using a X8  than x9 and even X9.5 with the E8500. they were more stable and with a higher FSB the entire system is faster.



that post was directed at will on page 1, and the math lesson was for everybody.

- Christine


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

calvary1980 said:


> that post was directed at will on page 1, and the math lesson was for everybody.
> 
> - Christine



we didn't need one but thx


----------



## calvary1980 (Apr 23, 2008)

that's what you think, but I think alot of people do.. 

- Christine


----------



## 3870x2 (Apr 23, 2008)

trt740 said:


> That may only be a benching speed not a stable 24/7 clock look in super PI I have one fastest e8400 and it was not my best 24/7 stable chip but it would bench very high. Super pi is all cpu 3dmarks 06 is not. Of all the  chips I have owned xeon and core 2 duo alike the E3110s don't seem to be better binned. They perform almost exactly as E8400s and use the same voltage. On These xeons Intel is full of crap. I'm not sure how they don't get sued. As Asus should over the Ramage / maximus B.S. Aswell as DFI



Sounds about right.  Xeons are server chips for a reason: they can take a massive beating.  Actual game FPS is probably actually lower, but since I havent actually tried it myself, it is based purely upon speculation.
Chips currently on my mind for next buy:
E82,3,400; Q6700, Q6600G0, Q9450, E3110.


----------



## HTC (Apr 23, 2008)

Try asking Paulieg: he's the only dude i know that uses / used E3xx0 chips. He sold one E3110 chip in one of the links i provided in an earlier post.


----------



## 3870x2 (Apr 23, 2008)

yeah, I saw that, and for only $180 to  boot.  Can someone give me some 3110 vs 8400 results? or will they be the same?


----------



## HTC (Apr 23, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> yeah, I saw that, and for only $180 to  boot.  Can someone give me some 3110 vs 8400 results? or will they be the same?



Best i can do is this:

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/914731.html

http://www.circuitremix.com/index.php?q=node/122


----------



## 3870x2 (Apr 23, 2008)

ive got a p35 from gigabyte but I cant seem to overclock my proc past 3.01, although I havent spent really any time in trying to figure out why it wont.


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> yeah, I saw that, and for only $180 to  boot.  Can someone give me some 3110 vs 8400 results? or will they be the same?



same.


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

3870x2 said:


> Sounds about right.  Xeons are server chips for a reason: they can take a massive beating.  Actual game FPS is probably actually lower, but since I havent actually tried it myself, it is based purely upon speculation.
> Chips currently on my mind for next buy:
> E82,3,400; Q6700, Q6600G0, Q9450, E3110.



no the E3110 ands E8400 are physically identical and the xeon doesn't use less voltage in my experience its a marketing ploy. I have a e3110 now.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Apr 23, 2008)

get teh 8400.


----------



## trt740 (Apr 23, 2008)

get a e8200 you will do 4.0ghz no problem with your board or a e8400/e3110 which ever is cheaper.


----------



## reviewhunter (Apr 23, 2008)

E8400, for few games takes advantage of quad-cores.


----------



## 3870x2 (Apr 24, 2008)

looks like E8400 it is, it is at a pretty cheap price point thus far.  What has surprised me is no one has said anything about the 9450.


----------



## hat (Apr 24, 2008)

Yeah if it was me, I would definately be getting the 8400. The 8200 is only $10 cheaper than the 8400 on the egg 

Just check for bios updates for your board before you do this. I think this processor will compliment your 3870x2 better than your 6750 can.


----------

