Is the price difference justified?....I'm looking to jump to the i7 series and looking at the 3 chips, the 965 is a wallet ball buster so I'm ruling that one out....lol... All the reading I've done so far is on the 920, mostly because I can't seem to find alot on the 940. At almost twice the price I'm wondering if the end OC'ing results would justify the extra costs (any thoughts from a 940 owner would be appreciated).
There seems to be some evidence that the limiting factor with these chips is the QPI, which based on the Bclk, which is why people are having trouble getting any chip above 220Bclk. If you've got the cooling to support the chip past about 4.3-4.4Ghz, then the 940 might be worth your while, but otherwise I'd stick with the 920.
i7 2600K | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 580GTX | Corsair DDR3-2133
you wont be able to go over 220 BLCK with the current non cherry picked X58 - i7 combo. This is the point where 940 vs 920 will make the difference. Now for theses OC you will have to put some serious voltage through and have better cooling than simple waterblock.
For example, I need 1.395 Volts for 4.1 Ghz stable on the 920, the VId of thoses chip his 1.3750 at the highest.
Sold hardware again..... Currently using WHS hardware....
I'm wondering if wc'ing would allow for better Oc's on the 940, but I'm guessing that would have to include wc'ing the nb and sb and there again would the extra cost be justified to squeeze out a few more 4.xx's.
Chilly?...my wife works for ING and she's been tellin' me ta save money for ages when it comes to computers!...lol....I've told her it could be worse, I could still be building Hot Rods!!..lol