WANTED - Obsolete CPU - Q9650

[MeerCaT]

Very long shot here, but if you don't ask you don't get...

 

I am looking to buy a 'new' (upgrade) CPU.

My mother board is quite old (by lastest standards) and supports only socket 775 (Intel) processors, but I don't believe any such processors are manufactured anymore.

Based on Internet searches this seems pretty much obsolete now.

 

 

One of the 'best' socket 775 CPUs seems to have been the "Intel Core2Quad Q9650", so that is the one I am hoping to find.

 

If anyone happens to have or know of one of these (or very similar) for sale then please let me know.

 

 

Thanks!

[EtherealN]

As a point of interest, what is your current CPU? Depending on the answer to that, and your intended use of the Q9650, this might actually be a "downgrade".

[MeerCaT]

I'm currently on "Intel DualCore Q6400".

A fairly low grade CPU within the socket 775 range, as far as I can tell from reasearch.

[EtherealN]

Ah, in that case it's fine.

 

If your main objective is DCS products, you could widen your search to the E8xxx processors, they'll likely give better performance in that specific application.

 

I'd generally advice you to hold on to your cash and just do a general mobo/mem/CPU upgrade though. You don't need to spend much at all to get something that is considerably more powerful than a Q9650. All depends on budget though, I suppose. I'd caution though that when I've seen Q's and E's for sale they've actually been MORE expensive than the much more powerful newer intel processors. (Go figure.)

[MeerCaT]

Yes thanks, that's sound advice.

 

I'm just looking for a 'quick-and-dirty' upgrade with the minimum of fuss (and money).

I figured the easiest way would be an upgrade to the best CPU my motherboard can support for a little extra number-crunching power.

 

 

PC component pricing is a strange beast.

Prices start astronomically high for 'bleeding-edge' technology, which then falls steadily and rapidly for 2 years or so and then after 3-5 years (once it is truely old news) the price rockets back up again.

[EtherealN]

Actually, another caution now that I doublechecked the specs of your Q6400: you might want to doublecheck some information about your mobo. The Q9xxx and E8xxx are generally aligned for motherboards with a 1333MHz FSB, while your Q6400 is based on 1066MHz FSB. This means that the Q9' and E8' will run at a lower speed than their rating on that motherboard unless the FSB itself is overclocked - effectively, you'll have to do a relatively aggressive overclock to even reach baseclock on those CPU's. Make sure your motherboard BIOS has support for this before spending money.

[JaBoG32_Prinzartus]

Hi MeerCat!

 

I just sold my Qx9650 rig, upgraded to Iwy Board and Sandy i2500k and I am experiencing a major FPS improvement (same GFX card in use) !!

 

My advice: upgrade to ivy bridge(!) board and consider buying a 2500k or even already iwy-bridge CPU.

 

Although I required a new MoBO, new RAM, new PSU I did not spend more than 250 Euro for this eintire upgrade. However, I could sell the older parts. The QX9650 alone brought me over 150€, wehreas my 2500k was about 180€. I'd really considering a major upgrade, in your case. Unfortunately you'll have to cop with system builder's mess during the upgrade. It did cost me two weekends. At least I did not(!) had to reinstall Windows nor DCS.

 

FYI, my qx9650 was never running at 100% during DCS gamplay. However my new rig does provide much better frames, so, i guess the system's "architecture" was the bottleneck.

Edited April 30, 2012 by JaBoG32_Prinzartus

[EtherealN]

Prinzartus, a Q9650 running at 100% in DCS gameplay is an impossiblity, since it's four cores and DCS only uses two. :)

[JaBoG32_Prinzartus]

Prinzartus, a Q9650 running at 100% in DCS gameplay is an impossiblity, since it's four cores and DCS only uses two. :)

 

Load was rather equally distributetd over all 4 cores, even during DCS-gamplay. I could never identify any two cores as being the cores used by DCS. I know this is strange, we discussed this "equally distributed load while DCS supoprts only two cores - issue" within my squad mates as well. No conclusion found.

 

In my case, no core ever went to 100% for longer than a second, except during, file zipping or benchmarking. I had the CPU running at 3,8 GhZ.

[EtherealN]

Which OS?

 

If Vista or 7, it's load-balancing. The task switches faster than the process monitor's refresh rate.

[Kuky]

I don't recomend such upgrade as you will not really do an upgrade, you will be getting already obsolete hardware, you will be much better off getting cheaper mobo/CPU/RAM of the later generation/socket like socket 1155

[MeerCaT]

EtherealN - Excellent point regarding the motherboard FSB speed/frequency, I hadn't given that a thought.

Luckily it turns out I'm fine, my motherboard can handle 1333Hz. (upto 1600Hz with overclocking, apparently)

 

But thanks to everyone for your comments and suggestion. It's certainly given me food for thought - and a hunger for more power! :)

 

I am now tempted by the prospect of spending a little more money (and 'wasted' weekends!) to do a more comprehensive upgrade.

 

It is so easy to spend other people's resources! :)

[EtherealN]

Hahah, yeah. :)

 

In this case though, I think you'll find it worth the extra weekends. I like hardware "problems" myself so if you propose a budget and main focus for the rig (and any components you intend to re-use) I can see if I can come up with something that fits and is cheap. It's always easy to come up with what is "best", but I particularly enjoy squeezing in the whole value proposition. :)

[hitman]

EtherealN - Excellent point regarding the motherboard FSB speed/frequency, I hadn't given that a thought.

Luckily it turns out I'm fine, my motherboard can handle 1333Hz. (upto 1600Hz with overclocking, apparently)

 

But thanks to everyone for your comments and suggestion. It's certainly given me food for thought - and a hunger for more power! :)

 

I am now tempted by the prospect of spending a little more money (and 'wasted' weekends!) to do a more comprehensive upgrade.

 

It is so easy to spend other people's resources! :)

Its all fun and games until you find out you might as well replace everything. About the only thing you can salvage from that old computer would probably be the memory, but even then I doubt that since the Q series chips ran on ddr2 memory. If you are gonna upgrade, do it right! Memory, cpu, motherboard. Make sure your power supply can handle it...the Q chips sucked less power than the 2500s, and youll need at least a 650w psu to supply it all.

[MeerCaT]

Thank you. More valid points and more money I can feel sliding out of my pocket.

 

I want my Amstrad CPC 464 back, with its 64Kb of internal memory, in-built cassette player/recorder and green screen monitor. ("Ready")

(http://www.shinmh.com/blog/junio2011/soyjugon/05.jpg)

 

Yes that's right kids, the only colour the monitor could produce was various shades of green!

...we couldn't afford those fancy-shmancy colour ones.

 

Oh how times have changed; There is now a whole new raft of things I can't afford, and have to enjoy from afar!

I think that's called "Progress"?

 

 

But anyway, turns out my processor is called "E6500" not "Q6500" (probably just means it is evern more worserer than I first thought), but all the points that have been raised still apply.

 

I actually think that some of the components in my system are not entirely terrible, I just have a few weak links in the chain.

 

The good (...well reasonable at least, no?):

- PSU: Artic Power 700W

- Video: GeForce GTX 460

- Monitor: 1 x LG22", 1 x DELL 17"

 

The Bad (...well, a little weak maybe):

- CPU: Intel Pentium Dual Core E6500 Socket 775 2.9GHz

- RAM: Corsair 4GB (2x2GB) DDR2 800MHz (PC2-6400)

- Mothers Bored: Gigabyte GA-P31-ES3G iP31 Socket 775

 

The Ugly:

- Doctor, I have this growth on my foot...

 

 

Now I know I'm not going to win any "mine is bigger than yours" contests, but the little beast is performing quite reasonable considering its limited power versus the demands made of it.

(we're still talking about computers right?)

 

So the reason I was/am/might be/should be focusing on just a simple CPU upgrade is that it currently seems to cope reasonably well with the activities invovled in rendering 3D environments and all the post-processing that can entail. (Think <insert_glossy_runny_shooty_game_here>).

 

But when it comes to flight simulators (DCS Blackshark, DCS Warthog, ToH, XPlane) the real bulk of the number crunching required doesn't seem to be in the generation of the 3D world (well, maybe for ToH) but rather the flight modelling calculations, and much of this work must be done by the CPU, while the graphics card GPU(s) spend their time drawing polygons from constantly changing angles and overlaying fancy lighty, shadowy and blurry pixels to make you go "ooo, shiny things!".

 

 

Or do you think I am putting too much emphasis on the role of the CPU?

Perhaps the other system components combine to produce a greater NET effect (performance increase/decrease) than the CPU alone?

[hitman]

A Q9650 will fit that socket.

 

If I were you, and had about 400 bucks to part with, I would just go with a new 2500k, a Gigabyte socket 1155 motherboard, and 8 gbs of Corsair DDR3.

[EtherealN]

Agreed with Hitman. (Though not _necessarily_ Gigabyte, many good vendors out there.)

 

Might end up being more money, but I definitely think you'll be happy with the result of going up to the 2500k, and it's not terribly expensive to do that kind of upgrade either.

[Humvee28]

I have to agree here with the previous Posters. Your Money is better invested in a newer SB Platform related to Price and Performance than upgrading your old Sys. :)