Intel Q9505 or Q9400

The Q9505 has a small clock speed advantage (2.83ghz vs 2.66ghz), other wise it's identical to the Q9400.

Are either of them the the 'S' models? The Q9505/Q9400 has a TDP of 95w compared to the Q9505S, Q9400S which has a max TDP of 65w.

At stock speeds, the Q9505 has the advantage. Overclocked, there wouldn't be be much, if any difference.


However, if you can still find them, a Q9550 or Q9650 would be a slightly better option as they have have 12mb L2 cache as opposed to the the Q9505/Q9400 which only has 6MB L2 cache.

smarteyeball said:

However, if you can still find them, a Q9550 or Q9650 would be a slightly better option as they have have 12mb L2 cache as opposed to the the Q9505/Q9400 which only has 6MB L2 cache.

The Q9550 is exactly what I am running and I love this CPU. The 12mb L2 was the driving factor to going with this CPU.

I'm using a 9550 too and it's great. The 12mb cache was also the factor for me to pay that bit extra for it, and it's worth it.

There is the 9450, which is the speed of the 9400 and the cache of the 9550, but they're pretty rare and the places I found them had them being more expensive than a 9550, but either way the 9550 is still worth that bit extra.

pcgamer said:

i was looking for the Q9550 as i was orginally looking for that but all websites stopped selling it for some reason

www.scan.co.uk have some of the energy efficient ones Scan.co.uk: Leading supplier of CPUs - Intel but they're a bit extra than a standard one. But really if you were going for that, you might as well spend the extra £10 or so and get the 9650.

Unfortunately they are more expensive because they are EOL (end of life) and are becoming rare.

A lot of the U.K stores do still have them, but unfortunately all are above £200 plus I don't know which U.K stores are reputable etc.

So, between the two original chips, only to be used at stock speeds then the Q9505 is the better chip.