Viewing page 5 of 6 pages.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Undervolting
Perhaps the most important value factor is whether a Q9550 can meet or exceed the lower power consumption
of a Q9550S through undervolting. After some fiddling, we managed to
get our Q9550 sample stable at 1.024V according to CPU-Z (1.03125V setting in
the BIOS). The Q9550S was stable at a minimum of 1.064V (1.075V in the
BIOS), which coincidentally is the same voltage applied when idling with SpeedStep
enabled.
|
CPU-Z screenshot: Q9550, best undervolt.
|
|
CPU-Z screenshot: Q9550S, best undervolt.
|
Undervolted Test Results
|
Test Results: General System Power Consumption
|
|
Test State
|
Q9550
|
Q9550S
|
|
Stock
|
UV
|
Stock
|
UV
|
|
Idle
|
64W
|
64W
|
62W
|
63W
|
|
VC-1
Playback
|
75W
|
75W
|
73W
|
74W
|
|
CPU Load
(2 cores)
|
120W
|
99W
|
105W
|
99W
|
|
CPU Load
(4 cores)
|
140W
|
117W
|
125W
|
118W
|
Undervolted, our Q9550 produced a 21W improvement when 2 of its cores were
fully stressed and 23W when all 4 were put to to pace. These results place it
ahead by 6-8W of the Q9550S at stock voltage. Undervolting the Q9550S
resulted in only a 6-7W improvement. The difference between the two processors
when undervolted to their respective minimum stable voltage was negligible.
|
Average Benchmark Power Consumption
|
|
Test
|
Q9550
|
Q9550S
|
|
Stock
|
UV
|
Stock
|
UV
|
|
NOD32
|
84W
|
75W
|
78W
|
74W
|
|
WinRAR
|
96W
|
83W
|
87W
|
83W
|
|
iTunes
|
89W
|
77W
|
81W
|
76W
|
|
TMPGEnc
|
113W
|
95W
|
102W
|
95W
|
|
Total Benchmark Power Consumption (Watt-hours)
|
|
NOD32
|
3.52
|
3.15
|
3.27
|
3.10
|
|
WinRAR
|
4.77
|
4.13
|
4.28
|
4.08
|
|
iTunes
|
5.27
|
4.56
|
4.79
|
4.50
|
|
TMPGEnc
|
6.09
|
5.12
|
5.53
|
5.15
|
Undervolted, each processor used approximately the same amount of power
during our timed benchmarks.
| Help support this site, buy the Intel Core 2 Q9550 Quad Core Processor from one of our affiliate retailers! |
|
