X3 710 build instead of Q6600

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:44 am

For a while I've been saving to build a Q6600 audio composition/gaming workstation. However, due to the lousy exchange rate pushing up the price of the Q6600 and other pressures on my finances, I'm thinking of building a X3 710 based system instead now.

The main advantages I have in mind are
(a) X3 710 is Â£102 compared to Q6600 Â£154
(b) 790GX board's IGP will suffice for now, saving me having to fork out Â£136 for a 4850 (although I will get a discrete card when I can afford it)
(c) a 790GX/X3 710 system should work OK with my 300W/18A on 12v line PSU, which although too noisy for my liking under load, will do while I save up for a decent quiet PSU.

I'd like to be able to get a decent overclock out of the X3 710 in the future, when I can afford a decent heatsink and PSU that can cope with that, but I'll run it at stock until then. The Foxconn A7DA-S 790GX looks like a fairly decent motherboard. The only concern I've identified so far is that the Northbridge gets very hot according to this article:
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/a7das/20.htm
and I don't want to have to stick a noisy fan on it.

Anyway, this thread is more to ask for people's thoughts on the pros/cons of my overall plan and I'll use the MoBo forum to help me make a final decision on which board to use.

Luminair · Post by **Luminair** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:48 am

to save money you should get ddr2 memory with a ddr2 motherboard. ddr3 is expensive and dead in the water because of the recession halting cpu advancements... the performance improvement might have mattered and the price might have gone down, but it doesn't and it didn't, so...

am3 processors work in am2+ motherboards, and I think am3 motherboards basically exist to provide ddr3 support

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:15 am

yeah, i'm not interested in ddr3. That foxconn mobo is DDR2, it's just the onboard sideport memory that's ddr3.

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:07 pm

The X3 710 is the one with the possibility of unlocking the extra core as well, isn't it?

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:44 pm

I believe so, but along with the possibility of it being too unstable to use

It's not something that it would be wise to base your choice of CPU on.

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:29 pm

doveman wrote:I believe so, but along with the possibility of it being too unstable to use

It's not something that it would be wise to base your choice of CPU on.

Just saying, but I'm not risking *my* money on it. Yours on the other hand...

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:34 am

Oi, hands off my money

trandy1001 · Post by **trandy1001** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:12 am

I've got the Phenom II 710, and I think that it is in fact the stepping that can be unlocked, but i don't have the right motherboard to do it

. So moot point.

In any case, I have it paired with a 9800GT in a 780G based Gigabyte motherboard.

The performance difference between this and the Phenom based Athlon X2 7750 (Overclocked to 3.1ghz) was drastic. Even with the 710 at stock 2.6ghz.

Mine will hit 2.9ghz with stock voltage, but that was with really quick and dirty BIOS tweaks, with some time and luck I could push 3.0ghz, but who knows. When the voltage is upped (1.45v) it'll do 3.5-3.6, but I haven't tried further. It was an exercise in "let's see what this thing can do".
Temps were great, even with a cramped Antec Fusion case and Ninja Mini.

I think that if you are looking to save money, this processor should do great for what you want to do.

I don't know how well onboard video will do for you, but you plan on upgrading to discrete anyway.

Tobias · Post by **Tobias** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:31 am

Trandy, If you try to undervolt, how much are you able to decrease the voltage at stock frequency?

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:55 pm

Thanks for the feedback Trandy, it's useful to hear from someone who's using the 710.

I'm not under any illusions that an IGP will be much use for FPS games but I think it will do as a temporary measure for RTS/RPG games and should be a darn sight better than the FX5600 I'm currently using

dereksbelanger · Post by **dereksbelanger** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:04 am

The 7750 Kuma is 1/2 the cost of a 710 and just as fast in many scenarios. I installed one recently and thought the temp sensor wasnt working because it read almost ambient temps...turns out thats just how it runs

*P182 + Xigmatek cooler

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:18 am

Thanks for the suggestion, I'd be interested to see some comparisons between the 7750 and the 710, but I imagine the extra core and the bigger cache would make quite a difference with audio software like Cubase and when doing video encoding.

dereksbelanger · Post by **dereksbelanger** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:09 am

As usual cores, cache and core speed influence performance differently in different programs.

Here is one interesting music related CPU chart:

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desk ... 2,828.html

Also works fast in Xvid

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desk ... 2,831.html

Not as fast in Divx, but still beating a few x3 and x4 CPUs

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desk ... 2,830.html

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:36 am

doveman wrote:Thanks for the feedback Trandy, it's useful to hear from someone who's using the 710.

I'm not under any illusions that an IGP will be much use for FPS games but I think it will do as a temporary measure for RTS/RPG games and should be a darn sight better than the FX5600 I'm currently using

Just as a info pt, I did try the 780G onboard graphics at 1280x1024 when I got my build--it was okay with Company of Heroes in DX9 mode. DX10 mode brought it to a crawl (like 5fps). Call of Duty 2 was okay except for when the smoke hit. I am just sticking with my X800 GTO2 for now.

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:00 am

dereksbelanger, thanks for the links to the charts. The 7750 certainly looks like it can hold it's own but I think I need to look into how it would compare with the 710 specifically with Cubase/Sonar and associated plugins.

psiu, thanks, sounds like I should be OK with the IGP for now as I'm still running a CRT @ 1280x1024 (or lower) and I've got no intention of using Vista/DX10.

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 7:49 pm

I'm still wavering

Due to concerns about the northbridge heat on the 780g boards, I decided to go for a non-IGP board and the cheapest one that comes closest to meeting all my requirements is the Gigabyte GA-MA790X-UD4 which costs Â£92. I also decided to get the 720 for Â£120 rather than the 710 for Â£102 to make overclocking simpler.

However, now I can get an OEM Q6600 for Â£137 and I'm thinking of pairing that with a Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3 which costs about the same as the 790GX-UD4. Apart from the advantage of the Q6600 for only Â£17 more, I get the impression that the 790GX NB still runs fairly hot and that the EP45 NB is much cooler, so that is pushing me that way.

Of course, the EP45-DS3 isn't an Ultra Durable board and doesn't have a heatsink on the MOSFETs unlike the MA790GX-UD4. Are either of those points worth giving much consideration too and are there any other downsides that I should consider?

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:08 am

If you are concerned about NB heat I'd say the 720 is a better choice since you just change the multiplier and not the HTT speed when overclocking. With the Q6600 you have to raise the FSB.
This will also keep your 720 at 800 MHz when in idle.
The Q6600 forces you to raise the idle speed with the FSB speed when overclocking. Is it 6 x 266 = 1600 MHz stock for EIST?

Socket 775 won't see any new CPU's coming in the future.
Socket AM2+ works with AM3 CPU's, but I don't know for how long it will stay that way.
Socket AM3 have the brightest future, but then again I haven't seen the plans AMD have for this socket.

I think I'd buy AM3 and DDR3 today if I didin't have any DDR2. Not for the non-existent performance advantage, but because it would give me more options in the future.
AM3 will last longer than AM2+, and even if my motherboard will be way outdated the day I want to upgrade, I knew that it could happen from the beginning. I know many people would disagree, but for me it's worth â‚¬20 extra.

A similar situation is my AM2(non +) board. I could get a new 710 for it and I know it would work, maybe just not perfect. But still, it gives me the opportunity to use it as long as I want to, and then I could upgrade the motherboard later on and keep the 710.
Imagine the same thing happening in the future. I get a new AMD Bulldozer CPU for my AM3 board, it may not be the best combination but it works. There are no guarantees, it's just speculations, I know that. Since it's supposed to show up about 2 years after the introduction of the AM3 socket with its DDR3, I really don't expect it to have a DDR2 controller, which means it won't work in AM2+ boards.

What I'm saying is that nobody knows if the next generation CPU will work in an AM3 board, but to me it seems highly unlikely that it would work in an AM2+ board because it probably wouldn't have a DDR2 controller.

With AMD's vision of having this kind of overlapping socket plan it's more tempting to see how far I can get with a motherboard than before.

Two things to look for when buying AMD motherboard:
1 - 125 W CPU support, 140 W is of course even better. Good to have when overclocking.
2 - Either the southbridge 710 or 750, which is needed to unlock the fourth core on X3's, you also need a BIOS that supports it.

doveman · Post by **doveman** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:51 am

Great info Mats. I've not much experience with overclocking so wasn't sure what I'd have to do with the Q6600 but if it requires adjusting the FSB, clearly the 720 is easier.

As I don't have any DDR2 I am considering getting the AM3/DDR3 Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-UD4P, rather than the AM2+/DDR2 GA-MA790X-UD4. It is Â£20 more but I'll probably go for it if DDR3 is about the same price when I come to buy the parts, probably in May when the Radeon 4770 is due to be released.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:22 am

I keep on seeing the mention of a 710.

why not a 720? any enthusiast wants this x100 over another 45nm phenom

6600 is so freakin old. please someone shoot that chip for me please.

no NEW build shoud use it. old? sure. new? just get a lowest clock 45nm part, much better wattage more cache and MOST important, you dont ahve to use an old board and chipset.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:34 am

Well I only mentioned the 710 as an example. Personally I'd go for the 720.
But you know me better than that ~El~Jefe~. After all, I was the one who told you to wait for 45 nm.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:39 am

lol yes that is true.

i have an e8400 now.

I really wished I bought the 720 amd chip.

makes much more sense. another core and same or better gaming speed on AMD chipsets and platforms. really, amd chipsets and boards are normally fileld with cool stuff, on board vid, etc for same or lesser price.

shoulda waited, but at least my system is low power and games well.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:58 am

Yeah well the E8400 is a really good one, and much better than the Phenom I 65 nm that people seems to have forgotten.
If I'd buy today it would be hard to choose between the 720 and the E8400. Sure, the 720 is unlocked, and then there's this possibility of having a X4 for cheap.
It may be an easy overclocker, but it's not a crazy overclocker. It won't do a 50 % OC that easy like my Opteron 2 GHz 146 which bumped up to 3 GHz just like that.
But the E8400 uses very little power, which makes it unique.
It all depends on what you're using it for, but since gaming is the only thing that limits the computer I use I'd say it's not that easy to choose, and that's even IF I unlock the fourth core.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:33 am

phenom II's share cache information.

when you play a game in windows, my e8400 sometimes stalls out. it really does. I thought that was a bogus stupid claim, but it does. OFTEN!!

amd chips didnt do that. its how windows does things with multi-cores.

I would rather get a 3rd core and same gaming speed than even more lower max wattage. at this point, all games will be using more than 2 cores effectively that are of the fancier publishers. the gap of performance is goign to get wide for core 2 duo's eventually.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:44 am

Ok, that's good to know. Is it a common problem?

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:20 am

intel doesnt share cache info. each core does its own thing.

phenom II and I think some older ones? share the info. XP and vista shift core duties in some sorta pattern that causes the cache to be emptied and re-pulled from memory. when the amd chips flip on account of windows asking, the info is there for either core to use and its seemless.

you can find a little info online. the smoothness gaming of amd phenom chips are unparalled.

sux how I didnt wait for the 720 BE

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:54 am

~El~Jefe~ wrote:intel doesnt share cache info. each core does its own thing.

You lost me there. It's a fact that they share cache, but you say they don't share the cache info? That makes no sense to me.

~El~Jefe~ wrote:sux how I didnt wait for the 720 BE

Do you think a C2Q would help you, even though they're made of the same dies?

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 7:26 pm

Oh, well intel shares the cache space, but each core gets its tag on the info its processing. Amd shares the info and the space.

thats as much as I know.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:32 pm

~El~Jefe~: Which OS and how much RAM do you have?