DEAD: AMD Quad Phenom 9600 RETAIL Black Editon - $69.99 AC - FREE shipping - Newegg

I've heard the quad cores don't offer much real-world performance improvement over dual cores with higher clock speeds.
Anyone with real-world, first-hand experience like to share insight?

sixt7gt350 said: I've heard the quad cores don't offer much real-world performance improvement over dual cores with higher clock speeds.
Anyone with real-world, first-hand experience like to share insight?Depends on which / how many applications you are running and how that software takes advantage of multiple cores factored with the abilities that the chip possesses. Check benchmarks for what programs you will likely be using and make your decision there.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/benchmarks,31.html

the price drops like a stone. $120-->$85-->$80-->$69.99.
the kuma 7550 is $65 on Newegg. I believe the difference between it and AMD Kuma 7550 greater than $5. I am thinking to add $5 more to get an AMD 9600 instead of Kuma 7550.

wfo said: sixt7gt350 said: I've heard the quad cores don't offer much real-world performance improvement over dual cores with higher clock speeds.
Anyone with real-world, first-hand experience like to share insight?Depends on which / how many applications you are running and how that software takes advantage of multiple cores factored with the abilities that the chip possesses. Check benchmarks for what programs you will likely be using and make your decision there.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/benchmarks,31.html

It looks like gaming and benchmarking tests put the 9600 on top, but many everyday apps put the 7750 (and the good old Athlon X2 6400) ahead.
I'm thinking the 7750 would be a better buy for my needs. (not much gaming, but I certainly don't like waiting on a processor)

cheerful said: I have this cpu and the fan is quite loud
Does the 9600 really crank out the heat? Is your fan loud because it's trying so hard to keep the processor cool? How does your CPU temp look?

Thanks.

i was interested in building a budget system that will run 24/7 and at the same time run the F@H program when I am not using it. The price on this quad core seems to be pulling me towards AMD. However, I wonder about heat issues while running it under full load 24/7 (due to F@H).

Any1 here using this processor and running F@H on it. How hot does this processor get?

NKSK said: Any1 here using this processor and running F@H on it. How hot does this processor get?
I don't have a heat problem. In fact here is what you do if you want to run this CPU passively cooled:

1. Get a Cooler Master Z600 cooler from your local Fry's for $40? It includes a good fan so that's a bonus (to be used else where if you wish). Extremely well made and high quality. The shape and fin separation makes it almost ideal for passive cooling.
2. Get a case with back and top exhaust fans

When I was running it in the mini P180 with top and back fans at low, Sunbeam Core Contact at ~900 RPM fan at pull (not push), never had it over 40 C 4 cores loaded with a passively cooled 850XT, several HDs, default Vcore and OC to 2.6 GHz ..

I am typing on it now in a first gen Sonata with no active exhaust(no rear fan, waiting on one, reason? those silicone fan stubs are hard to come by so it has to be right fan the first time), 4 HDs (5 soon).. with side door off, max temp, 36-38 C.

Not sure why Fry's sells the CM Z600 $20 cheaper than Newegg and do not buy the V8 or the V10. They are both crap.

IStillPickUpPennies said: I am very tempted by this, but I think I'm going to hold off for something lower wattage. Anyone know what is coming down the pipeline as far as 45nm based energy efficient processors in the next few months?

If I went with something right now, it would probably be the 5050, but I was hoping something with some of the characteristics of a Phenom II might be coming.
I doubt heat will be much of a problem as long as you don't overclock/volt. In fact you could try to lower the voltage after a couple of days and save power it may or may not work more likely will. Standard fan that it comes with should be fine only change it for noise or overclocking. This is not that high power the standard X2 uses 89 Watts. This should do twice what an X2 would for far less than double the power especially if you have a video card on F@H.

The AMD Phenom II X4 810 2.6GHz is same power but faster and more efficient and has no problem with 64 bits but is twice the money. I may wait for one of these myself only the Core I7 is faster but it is way more expensive. You wouldn't want an X3 for F@H.

81drift said: siliconbeaver said: the price drops like a stone. $120-->$85-->$80-->$69.99.
the kuma 7550 is $65 on Newegg. I believe the difference between it and AMD Kuma 7550 greater than $5. I am thinking to add $5 more to get an AMD 9600 instead of Kuma 7550.

been contemplating the same thing.
the coupon code for Kuma (CPU345) knocks another $5 off, so the price difference is actually around $10 after all discounts.

but keep in mind that the Kuma is a Black Edition and will require you to buy a fan.

decisions decisions...

as far as I know the 9600 is black also at least when I ordered it from Newegg it was a black edition

sixt7gt350 said: I've heard the quad cores don't offer much real-world performance improvement over dual cores with higher clock speeds.
Anyone with real-world, first-hand experience like to share insight?

Two words: "video encoding".

Nothing like seeing my overclocked 3.0Ghz (Q6600) Quad core will all 4 cores at 98%+ utilization. I can still play games while that is going on too.

Edit:
If it's any comparison my rough benchmarks (HandBrake encoding a DVD resolution ~ 2 hour movie to MKV H.264 (2 pass) with ACC surround sound on 2 of my PC's are:

Intel 3.0 Ghz Quad encodes in <2 hours. (Turbo first pass ~150fps, second pass ~35 fps)
Single core AMD 64 1.8Ghz PC takes ~ 10 hours (!) (1.5 hours first pass, 8.5 hours second pass).

Obviously there are some newer SSE support and faster RAM on the intel that help as well.

sardarji said: Nothing beats Q6600. I have overclocket it to 3.4 Ghz. Amazing chip.

Not sure how that helps here. It's 180 dollars right now, almost three times the prices.

BTW, the main reason I and others don't buy this thing is the power....but does anyone know if these can be underclocked to significantly lower power?

-Glen

ughh these prices are so tempting.... I have a athlon X2 5000+. Id need a new mobo so Ill pass until this one dies(or if there is a steal combo)

7750 Kuma Black Edition includes a basic aluminum heatsink (mine arrived on Tuesday).

I've been waiting for 45nm quad cores and their respective motherboards to come down to the good side of $200 for a year now to upgrade my folding farm... Deals like this sure make it a tough wait.

From just what you ask, the Kuma is the obvious choice. Current games only use two cores and by the time games are made to utilize a quad core all of the current processors (in this price range at least) will be old and slow. Basically you want to look for a processor with at least two cores with the highest clock rate at whatever price you want to pay. That being said I do not know how the two overclock or if you are even interested in OCing as that could change things.

So... I'm assuming it would be smart to get an AM2+ / AM3 mobo so that you can swap in a new AMD AM3 chip in a few years when the prices are much lower... Is that a wise decision?

VirtuaL said: My friend bought one of these chips, and he says that it BSODs on him with Vista64 all the time. But it's OK with Vista32. Is there something about these CPUs that would prevent sucessfully running them with a 64-bit OS?
64 bit codes are tricky (memory handling/mapping). I had issues with my marginally stable (or not stable) OC 9600 trying to install the 64 bit Win 7 Beta. It won't even install (freezes at some point) till I drop it back to default. If he has issues even at default, there is something else in his system that's not set right.

Sounds like a faulty memory stick.

deadmaulwalking said: VirtuaL said: Korro said: I purchased this back when it was 99.00. When it ran it ran good...however it would freeze the computer everyday. Never knew when it would freeze it just did. Also when trying to install Vista x64 or windows 7 x64 one of the processors would report an error. I had to RMA the chip already and AMD should have it Monday! Hopefully they send me a new chip! Performance wise it outstanding...accept for the error.

My friend bought one of these chips, and he says that it BSODs on him with Vista64 all the time. But it's OK with Vista32. Is there something about these CPUs that would prevent sucessfully running them with a 64-bit OS?

I can't speak for this processor, but if he is installing Vista 64-bit Ultimate without Service Pack 1 and has over 4gb of RAM in his build, then it will BSOD like crazy during install. I had to remove sticks and drop it down to 2gb to install it without blue screen and install Service Pack 1 in order to use the full 4gb of RAM.

Sounds weird, but that's how it goes. I also found out that the reason Vista takes 4 minutes to boot for me is because I have 4gb of RAM....drop it down to 2gb and it boots incredibly fast. I think it also has to do with your motherboard (I have an ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe), so maybe check for a BIOS upgrade to see if that helps any strange goings-on.