E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps, etc

All about them.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
ST
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:18 pm
Location: Silicon Valley

E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps, etc

Post by ST » Fri May 02, 2008 1:35 pm

After just acquiring my Q9300, I've now had the chance to review all 3 45nm Wolfdale/Yorkfield CPU in my systems and here are some measurements and observations:

System:
Asus P5E-VM HDMI
Scythe Ninja Rev. A (fanless)
OCZ 4GB DDR2-800
Seasonic 600W PSU
3X WD 1TB GP
Lite On Blu Ray

Image

All systems were configured to run a it's minimum voltage for 3.0GHz to make a fair clock for clock measurement:

Intel Wolfdale Core 2 Duo Xeon E3110 (E8400 equivalent) (3.0GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 75W Idle @ 27C
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 123W (full OCCT) @ 44C

Intel Yorkfield Core 2 Quad Q9300 45nm Core 2 Quad CPU (2.5GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.088V) -> 82W Idle @ 42C
3.0GHz (1.088V) -> 130W (full OCCT) @ 55C

Intel Yorkfield Core 2 Quad Q9450 45nm Core 2 Quad CPU (2.66GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 82W Idle @ 53C
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 141W (full OCCT) @ 68C

It's incredible the difference betwen all 3 chips. E3110 aka E8400 runs amazingly cool. So much so that I had to triple check the temp calculations. I could probably run a completely fanless system if i kept the clocks low with this CPU! Q9450 is just a power hog, running really hot when stressed. Although its quiet powerful, that extra 6mb of cache sets this it on fire when fully loaded. And the Q9300 is just the perfect combination in my opinion. It's powerful with 4 cores and is able to clock just as much as the Q9450 (albeit on a more stressed out FSB), but it is much cooler in its operation. This is a keeper for me for sure and which i would recommend to any HTPC/Quiet-PC enthusiast who needs the power, without all the thermals (and associated noise with it).

Note: I realize there is chip to chip variance for temps, voltage, but i have been following other owners experience and they do correlate with mine.

FartingBob
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:05 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by FartingBob » Fri May 02, 2008 1:59 pm

Damn i didnt think that the 9450 would be THAT much hotter than the 9300 at the same clock speed, they are extremely similar designs. To me it just confirms that a 9300 with some overclocking is the way to go. Although i might still wait for the next generation to come outlater this year or early next. But i expect temptation will get the best of me first. :lol:

BillyBuerger
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 856
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2002 1:49 pm
Location: Somerset, WI - USA
Contact:

Post by BillyBuerger » Fri May 02, 2008 5:51 pm

I assume that's total system power draw from the wall? The Q9300 and Q9450 both had the same power draw at idle. That should mean the same amount of heat is being dissipated by the CPU. I suppose maybe slightly more from the chipset on the Q9300 due to a higher FSB to get the same clock speed. So if the power usage is the same and the cooling is the same, the temperatures should be very close. Are the thermal sensors on these chips suppose to report actual temperatures that can be compared between different CPUs?

I always took thermal readings with a grain of salt. I had an old P4 that always reported 60C at idle even when there was barely any heat coming off of it. Heck, it was 60C immediately after booting before it even had a chance to warm up. I think it sat around 70C under load but never showed any signs of instability or throttling.

Mikey
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:14 pm

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by Mikey » Mon May 12, 2008 5:10 pm

ST wrote: Intel Wolfdale Core 2 Duo Xeon E3110 (E8400 equivalent) (3.0GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 75W Idle @ 27C
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 123W (full OCCT) @ 44C

Intel Yorkfield Core 2 Quad Q9300 45nm Core 2 Quad CPU (2.5GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.088V) -> 82W Idle @ 42C
3.0GHz (1.088V) -> 130W (full OCCT) @ 55C

Intel Yorkfield Core 2 Quad Q9450 45nm Core 2 Quad CPU (2.66GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 82W Idle @ 53C
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 141W (full OCCT) @ 68C
Great Comparison! :D

I've recently been debating this very subject. If you're running them at 1.072 / 1.088 (vCore?), i'm very impressed. I didn't realise you could undervolt that much!

How have you done your stability testing at such low voltages?

-Mikey

croddie
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:52 pm

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by croddie » Tue May 13, 2008 5:10 am

ST wrote: Asus P5E-VM HDMI
Scythe Ninja Rev. A (fanless)
OCZ 4GB DDR2-800
Seasonic 600W PSU
3X WD 1TB GP
Lite On Blu Ray

Intel Wolfdale Core 2 Duo Xeon E3110 (E8400 equivalent) (3.0GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 75W Idle @ 27C
Xbit says E8500 is 3.4W idle (actual processor power consumption). Any idea what is taking the remaining 72W? Any interest in disconnecting some drives to check?

valnar
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:19 am
Location: OH, USA

Post by valnar » Sat May 17, 2008 8:21 pm

ST. Very interesting. Can anyone else confirm his numbers too?

If you still have all three processors, I would be interested in how they perform at their respective stock. I don't overclock, but undervolt occasionally. I really only need an E8400, but if the Q9300 power consumption is slightly higher, I could go with that. I'm very concerned with heat and power.

The biggest difference between the Q9300 and Q9450 is the cache, so I wonder if that has a lot to do with it. It couldn't be the .5 multiplier.

Robert

Strid
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:09 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by Strid » Sat May 17, 2008 10:04 pm

croddie wrote:
ST wrote: Asus P5E-VM HDMI
Scythe Ninja Rev. A (fanless)
OCZ 4GB DDR2-800
Seasonic 600W PSU
3X WD 1TB GP
Lite On Blu Ray

Intel Wolfdale Core 2 Duo Xeon E3110 (E8400 equivalent) (3.0GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 75W Idle @ 27C
Xbit says E8500 is 3.4W idle (actual processor power consumption). Any idea what is taking the remaining 72W? Any interest in disconnecting some drives to check?
Yeah, interesting study. I too would like to see the effect from disconnecting the four harddrives. Also, the reason for the relatively high wattage for such an incredibly energy efficient setup might be the 600 watts PSU. The PSU might not be very effective at ~100 W. I will see if I can find a review.

EDIT: The PSU claims 70% efficiency at 75 W and roughly 80% at full load on your computer (130'ish watts).
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=10 ... pert&pid=6



*Assuming that your PSU really is Seasonic S12-600.

ST
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:18 pm
Location: Silicon Valley

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by ST » Sat May 17, 2008 11:03 pm

Mikey wrote:
Great Comparison! :D

I've recently been debating this very subject. If you're running them at 1.072 / 1.088 (vCore?), i'm very impressed. I didn't realise you could undervolt that much!

How have you done your stability testing at such low voltages?

-Mikey
Thanks. I check stability via OCCT utility running for a period of ~12 hours.

If I have time, I'll try to disconnect the HDDs (I have 4 WD GP 1TB HDDs now).....

juamez
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:17 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by juamez » Sun May 18, 2008 12:55 am

Strid wrote: EDIT: The PSU claims 70% efficiency at 75 W and roughly 80% at full load on your computer (130'ish watts).
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=10 ... pert&pid=6



*Assuming that your PSU really is Seasonic S12-600.
Is that 75W that comes with with 70% from the wall or from the psu? Because if the topicstarter measured a pull from the wall of 77W, then I'd think his system would draw a typical 50ish Watts, because of the lower efficiëncy at that low power need.
Last edited by juamez on Sun May 18, 2008 3:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

Strid
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:09 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by Strid » Sun May 18, 2008 3:25 am

juamez wrote:
Strid wrote:EDIT: The PSU claims 70% efficiency at 75 W and roughly 80% at full load on your computer (130'ish watts).
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=10 ... pert&pid=6



*Assuming that your PSU really is Seasonic S12-600.
Is that 75W that comes with with 70% from the wall or from the psu? Because if the topicstarter measured a pull from the wall of 77W, then I'd think his system would draw a typical 50ish Watts, because of the lower efficiëncy at that low power need.
I don't know if it's 75 W from the wall or from the PSU. It's impossible to tell from the article. But I agree with you. His system would probably draw 50-60 Watt from the PSU. I myself is contemplating to ditch my current GPU and motherboard and get a G35/630i chipset motherboard and run the lot off a passive PSU since I don't ever play games anymore.

May I ask what the purpose of this PC is, HTPC or workstation?

Cheers

ST
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:18 pm
Location: Silicon Valley

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by ST » Mon May 19, 2008 10:53 am

Strid wrote:I don't know if it's 75 W from the wall or from the PSU. It's impossible to tell from the article. But I agree with you. His system would probably draw 50-60 Watt from the PSU. I myself is contemplating to ditch my current GPU and motherboard and get a G35/630i chipset motherboard and run the lot off a passive PSU since I don't ever play games anymore.

May I ask what the purpose of this PC is, HTPC or workstation?

Cheers
The purpose of my setup is a pure HTPC build:

Image

FYI - My measurement for the above system was done at the wall via a KILL-A-WATT meter.

greyskies
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 4:06 pm
Location: United States

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by greyskies » Mon May 19, 2008 12:41 pm

What case are you using for your system?

I am looking at the same core for an htpc. Specifically, the Asus P5E-VM, an E8400 CPU, 4Gb of OCZ Reaper PC-6400 DDR2 RAM, but with a Zalman PS and a Zalman 9700 CPU Cooling HS/Fan.

Any reason that you chose the Scythe Ninja rather than a Zalman HS/Fan solution? Noise is my most important concern since this HTPC unit will reside in my bedroom (WAC is crucial), but do not want the CPU to overheat.

Thanks for your response

ST
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:18 pm
Location: Silicon Valley

Post by ST » Mon May 19, 2008 1:11 pm

greyskies - I have always a big proponent of Sycthe Ninjas, especially their ability to run passively (no fans). With Intel's new generation of 45nm CPU - it is actually plausible now.

Below is synopsis of the case I use:
Just want to give some feedback on this case. I've worked on 3 of these now including my own (nSPIRE OEM clone) and I would highly recommend it. While others offerings may excel in particular area (price, dimensions, storage, looks, quietness, accessories, etc.), this little beauty has it all:

- Front and Rear 120mm fan mountings
- Gloss front case finish
- 4(!) 3.5" internal HDD bays
- Great dimensions : 17'' x 7.5'' x 14.1''
- Price: ~$35 w/o PSU ($65 w/ 350 PSU)

This is the only uATX case I know that has both front and rear 120mm fan mounts (for nice quiet cooling) and can accomdate 4+ HDDs readily (which is a dream for my HTPC / Media Server). Furthermore, with the small footprint, I can stash it in my entertainment center readily, yet it is tall enough to accomdate the newer behemoth HSFs (like my Scythe Ninja). About the only thing I would of liked more is that they make it in a desktop orientation (so i can use it as a real HTPC :D ). Below are pics from Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6811124130) and one from my own build:

Image
Image
Image

Image

Esben
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:35 am
Location: Denmark

Post by Esben » Wed May 21, 2008 2:33 pm

I'm running a somewhat similar system:

Gigabyte P35-DS3R rev 2.1
Intel E8200
Corsair TwinX 2GB DDR2-800
Scythe Ninja Mini fanless
Hitachi T7K500 320 GB
Pioneer BDC-202BK
Radeon HD 3450
Chill CP-450A4 450W PSU.

I've undervolted the CPU to 1.1v in BIOS, which is the lowest it can run stable. CPU-Z reports 1.04v

My power draw measured with Kill-A-Watt is 70W idle and 90W Orthos Small FFT. Loading the GPU with rthdribl HDR rendering adds an extra 10W.

The only fan is in the power supply, and the system is stable and temperatures are fine.

greyskies
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 4:06 pm
Location: United States

Post by greyskies » Wed May 21, 2008 2:53 pm

Naively, let me ask, why would you undervolt your CPU?

I have an E8400 on order from NE.com with an Asus P5E-VM motherboard, and 4Gb of OCZ DDR2-800 RAM. Should I consider undervolting my CPU, and what can I expect if I do undervolt it?

FartingBob
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:05 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by FartingBob » Wed May 21, 2008 3:47 pm

greyskies wrote:Naively, let me ask, why would you undervolt your CPU?
There is no reason why you wouldn't want to really.
there's a difference between under/over volting and under/over clocking.
Undervolting does not effect performance. You can safely run your CPU at stock or a small over clock whilst undervolting it. Improves thermals and power efficiency. There is a limit and it depends on the mobo and CPU, but generally as long as you do it in small steps you cant damage your CPU by undervolting. You do get instability if you push it too far, but it shouldnt cause long term damage.

seemingly.random
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:51 am
Location: Southeast, USA

Post by seemingly.random » Wed May 21, 2008 7:44 pm

ST wrote:Below is synopsis of the case I use:
[snip]
I have used the Enermax VOSTOK matx case for almost a year now - purchased it on a whim. Although physically flimsy, it's a cool, quiet case after swapping sides to hide the vents which leak noise and replacing the toy psu and fans. Especially like the provision for two 120mm fans - the front one blows across the hd's. The tool-free capability of the dvd bays is both innovative and annoying. I would pay a little more for a case with this configuration if there was more metal in it. I'm currently looking for another one without the psu.

In my experience, if a case is wide enough to accommodate a 120mm rear fan above the mb i/o ports, there will be enough room for any cpu hsf currently available.

There are a couple of other small cases that have front and rear 120mm fans but the front fan doesn't flow across the hd's. Don't know why other manufacturers haven't figured this out yet. This probably isn't important for just one drive but all the available video content is requiring multiple drives...

enermax vostok marketing - wonder how many have been sold

MikeC
Site Admin
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by MikeC » Wed May 21, 2008 11:38 pm

ST wrote:Intel Wolfdale Core 2 Duo Xeon E3110 (E8400 equivalent) (3.0GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 75W Idle @ 27C
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 123W (full OCCT) @ 44C

Intel Yorkfield Core 2 Quad Q9300 45nm Core 2 Quad CPU (2.5GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.088V) -> 82W Idle @ 42C
3.0GHz (1.088V) -> 130W (full OCCT) @ 55C

Intel Yorkfield Core 2 Quad Q9450 45nm Core 2 Quad CPU (2.66GHz stock)
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 82W Idle @ 53C
3.0GHz (1.072V) -> 141W (full OCCT) @ 68C
The OP has confirmed these are AC power readings. Our SPCR review of the S12-600 is here: http://www.silentpcreview.com/article247-page4.html -- extrapolate the numbers a bit from the bottom table, and we get around 55W/96w, 62W/104W & 62W/113W in DC power for the 3 systems.

croddie
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:52 pm

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by croddie » Thu May 22, 2008 7:42 pm

ST wrote:The purpose of my setup is a pure HTPC build:
Nice system. Speakers will be very unhappy though in their current positions, as I'm sure you know.

williemues
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 1:07 pm

Re: E8400(E3110) vs Q9300 vs Q9450 Power Consumption, Temps,

Post by williemues » Sun May 25, 2008 12:27 pm

ST wrote:This is a keeper for me for sure and which i would recommend to any HTPC/Quiet-PC enthusiast who needs the power, without all the thermals (and associated noise with it).
Do you do any postprocessing, since you prefer the quad core over the dual core?

And if so how do the processor usage/percentage compare (I´m asking because I´m looking for an upgrade for my E6600, which, with my postprocessing settings (ffdshow, Avisynth etc. for optimized dvd-playback) is on around 70% cpu usage (both cores) - making it necessary to run my 2 120mm Yate Loons/Ninja at 80%= no silentpc...)?

Regards, Finn

Schlotkins
Posts: 278
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am

Post by Schlotkins » Sun Jun 01, 2008 6:02 am

ST-

Thanks for posting these numbers. I'm in the process of choicing either the Q9300 or the Q9450. I'm doing a lot of modeling in Excel 2007 now and it appears the cache does make a difference as the Q6600 is faster than the Q9300 even with the higher clock and FSB.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/695/6/

Do you know what the default voltage on the Q9450 is? Did you try to undervolt at all?

It's scary - I'm thinking about just the same system except with only 2 drives and my S12-430 so the numbers should be within 5 watts.

Thanks!
Chris

solaris
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: US

Post by solaris » Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:52 pm

ST,

By coinsidence I'm looking for the same ASUS P5E-VM HDMI + Q9300(or Q9450).
I'm not experienced in overclocking.
My current system is ECS G33T-M2 + Q6600 (oc 2.9GHz).

Is overclocking this ASUS really tricky ?
It would be really great if you can post parameters you played with.

Thank you in advance,

VD

fri2219
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: Forkbomb, New South Wales

Holy cow...

Post by fri2219 » Mon Jun 09, 2008 10:59 pm

Your Q9300 result is much higher than what I've experienced and read in other forums.

Mine never gets above 30C, ever- it is running 2-4 Virtual Machines at any one time, even after 4 hour compiles. (VM's for Domain Server, Web Server, Compilation Farm, DB Server). The case has rotten airflow, and it is literally stuffed with disks as well.

Lian Li A5 Case
Q9300
4 x 2GB Kingston PC6400 @ 1.8V
Apack BTF90, no fan
1 x 120 Nexus Front, In
1 x 80 Nexus Front, In
1 x 120 Nexus Back, Out
1 x WD Raptor 150GB 10K (boot)
4 x WD GP 500GB (RAID 5)
1 Areca 1210 Controller
Zalman Replacement Northbridge Heatsink
Gigabyte G33 series uATX board, CPU undervolted to 1.0V, FSB -0.1V
Seasonic S12II-430 PSU, ADDA fan swapped w/Scythe Slipstream

Under normal use, CPU runs between 18C-23C (lmsensors)
HD's run at 32-36C (smartd)

valnar
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:19 am
Location: OH, USA

Post by valnar » Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:08 am

I'm not sure how we can have such differences with a Q9300. It must be mobo sensors.

Run Real Temp and tell us your Distance to TJ Max at idle and load.

jaganath
Posts: 5085
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Location: UK

Post by jaganath » Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:01 am

Under normal use, CPU runs between 18C-23C
what is your ambient temp? seems unlikely if ambient is also 18-23C.

FartingBob
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:05 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by FartingBob » Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:20 am

jaganath wrote:
Under normal use, CPU runs between 18C-23C
what is your ambient temp? seems unlikely if ambient is also 18-23C.
I agree, unless your room is around 10c ambient i doubt that temp reading is accurate. whats your GPU/HDD temps under load?

fri2219
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: Forkbomb, New South Wales

Post by fri2219 » Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:09 pm

FartingBob wrote:
jaganath wrote:
Under normal use, CPU runs between 18C-23C
what is your ambient temp? seems unlikely if ambient is also 18-23C.
I agree, unless your room is around 10c ambient i doubt that temp reading is accurate. whats your GPU/HDD temps under load?
Ambient: 17-23C
HD RAID: 45C peak under load.

Boot HD monitored, but not recorded as long as it stays under 50C.

Host operating system is Debian Linux, headless, haven't bothered to install X, much less Nagios- the only 16x PCIe slot is occupied by the RAID controller, graphics are through the G33/GMA3100- GPU Temps not monitored.

bgavin
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:05 pm
Location: Orangevale, CA

Re: Holy cow...

Post by bgavin » Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:49 am

fri2219 wrote:Mine never gets above 30C, ever- it is running 2-4 Virtual Machines at any one time...
If you don't mind, how is your VM set up? I bought VMware 6 workstation, and just curious how well it performs with 4 VMs running.

Post Reply