From FC AMD to FC Intel - help iron out a good transfer deal

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:32 am

You can skip this preamble and go straight to my system configuration if you are just that way inclined.

My brother and I are both in the processes of upgrading our home computers. We have both used AMD processors for several years now [mainly due to necessity] as Intel has been beyond our budgets in the past. Now that Intel's platform is no longer that expensive (at the low-mid-range consumer end at least), we are both considering "making the switch"

.

Being value minded and an underdog fan, I have long felt part of the AMD camp. But I have had a gutful of AMD's drivers and the lack of support. The only thing that really compels me to stay is the low power usage of my 780G setup. But I am not fanatical when it comes to extracting maximum efficiency -- even despite soaring electricity costs. I'm willing to sacrifice this in order to have a more stable and hassle free system. I use very little electricity elsewhere in the home, so any extra PC power use can be offset. Plus, I don't need a HTPC.

My main computer uses are for office and publishing programs, maintaining photo libraries from my digicam, playing back high quality encoded media from my classical CD and DVD collections, and internet consisting mostly of plain web browsing and email. I do some photo editing in applications like GIMP and other freeware; some audio and video editing also; but nothing of a professional nature. I like versatility, so I need a system that can handle a variety of tasks without too much fuss. I will be using Windows XP Pro and moving to Windows 7 in the future. WinXP has problems with modern hardware, and reports I have read of Win7 are very positive so far. I have no real desire or need to use Linux at this stage, but I will try out some distributions in virtual machines.

So, with that in mind, I am considering rebuilding my system based on these components:

Intel Pentium E6300
-- this is literally 50% of the cost of a C2D E8400 (which would be great to own, but I don't need that much power) and a better option in my book than the Pentium E5xxx and C2D E7xxx series as the E6300 has Intel Virtualization Technology. The smaller L2 cache shouldn't have any serious impedance on my intended applications.
Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P (rev. 1.1)
-- this has been praised in many places already, and while I don't need its high performance features, I appreciate its overal feature set, stability, and relative efficiency. Not to mention, its excellent pricing.
ATI Radeon HD4350/4550 PCI-E 2.0
-- No specific brand and model of graphics card chosen. The Radeon HD2400 Pro which I would be happy with is discontinued and no longer available. A passively cooled, low power, dual DVI capable card is ideal for my purposes. I haven't used an Nvidia card for years, so if there is something else I should consider that is in the budget range and good enough for my uses (which don't include gaming) please advise me.

I already have the following components which I can carry over:

2x1GB Kingston Value RAM DDR2 800
Pioneer DVR-216BK 20x SATA optical drive
Western Digital WD6400AAKS SATA HDD
Antec Solo mid tower case
Corsair VX450 power supply unit
Scythe Slipstream 1200 120mm fans x 2
Noctua NF-B9 92mm fan (not needed so far)
Xigmatek HDT-D1284 top-down heatsink
Arctic Cooling MX-2 thermal interface material

What I may need to add is 2 quieter HDDs for system or storage use. I am considering the Samsung F2 EcoGreen HD502HI, but wondering whether to wait for the upcoming reviews of WD and Seagate's 500GB platter drives before I commit to the purchase.

I may also need a better suited CPU heatsink for the Intel E6300, as the HDT-D1284 is better suited to an AMD CPU. Or should I just buy a LGA775 backplate for it as the push pin system is fairly dodgy. I like the Xigmatek heatsinks, but they aren't that budget friendly--at least not in my location. When you add the cost of the Xigmatek HDT-S1283 (tower HS) and backplate and shipping (AUD $55+15+15), it comes to the same price as a Noctua NH-U12P, which is arguably better value considering what you get in the package, while also being available for pickup locally.

Another question (I appreciate your patience so far): Is there any benefit to transitioning to DDR3 at this stage to avoid sudden obsolescence when building a DDR2 system? DDR3 boards and memory are trickling down to the same price range as DDR2 with some boards being even cheaper (perhaps due to insufficient demand?). I just want to avoid being caught out with swiftly changing technology as I did with my build several years ago

.

Apologies for any incoherency on my part should it be perceived

.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:52 pm

Of course you'll go for HD502HI, because I'm going for it. You promised me you'll support me

DDR3 is getting cheaper, because there's no great demand for the i7 platform, which supports DDR3 memory only. Currently there's only a very slim lead for DDR3 over DDR2 operating at the same speed, but do understand that JEDEC standard does not specify DDR2 at speeds higher than 800Mhz. DDR3 on the other hand supports faster speeds officially.

Also, get the NVIDIA GeForce 8400GS. You'll not regret it, it's so cheap you simply can't go wrong with it

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 3:23 pm

Except the 8400GS is on par with with Radeon 9600...where the HD4350 is equal to his HD2400. And has onboard audio if ever needed.

I wouldn't worry about DDR2/DDR3. By the time you go to replace these systems they'll probably be on DDR5 anyways.

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:45 pm

LodeHacker wrote:Of course you'll go for HD502HI, because I'm going for it. You promised me you'll support me

Samsung F2 EcoGreen fan club must be gaining momentum. Going to take a lot to outdo the WD Green [fan]boys, but you have to start somewhere.

LodeHacker wrote:Also, get the NVIDIA GeForce 8400GS. You'll not regret it, it's so cheap you simply can't go wrong with it

Only what I expected from an Nvidia [fan]boy

. Tell you what, I might end up getting both 8400GS and HD4350 if I can find them. Never know when in the future you may need to throw in a budget card for another system or have one handy if one dies. Any particular brand you suggest? In my locality, I have seen ASUS, eVGA, Gainward, Galaxy, Gigabyte, Inno3D - any one to avoid at all costs? They are all 512MB models now. Hard to get 256MB ones.

psiu wrote:Except the 8400GS is on par with with Radeon 9600...where the HD4350 is equal to his HD2400. And has onboard audio if ever needed.

I wouldn't worry about DDR2/DDR3. By the time you go to replace these systems they'll probably be on DDR5 anyways.

Everyone here seems to knock the lowly 8400GS (except for LodeHacker of course

) unless they really need it for Linux compatibility. The HD4350 seems to draw more power than the HD2400 in idle, but I have seen conflicting data and user reports. Perhaps due to sample variances.

Any other thoughts on CPU choices? There's not a lot of discussion here about the new Intel Pentium E6300. Only that of the much older C2D E6300 which is a totally different processor. I've read some very positive user feedback on it over at newegg. A noticeable difference between this and the C2D lines is its weaker L2 cache size of 2MB (still more than my Athlon 64 X2 with 1MB and Duron with 64KB). In what instances and applications would I gain from a larger L2 cache size, for example that of the C2D E8400 with 6MB?

I realise moving over to an Intel P45 platform with discrete graphics will increase power consumption and heat, but I don't think I have anything serious to worry about. I think it would be only a minimal increase.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:03 am

Shamgar wrote:Any particular brand you suggest?

ASUS all the way brother, try to get hold of the silent model, which uses the newer G98 core: http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=NamCbx9IwqvXUIog

Everyone here seems to knock the lowly 8400GS (except for LodeHacker of course )

It is a fantastic graphics card. For its price it is excellent value and the performance offered is sufficient for a lot of different tasks and it can also decode HD video in hardware. I really don't understand how a non-gamer wouldn't go for this (unless they are ATi obsessed, of course).

Shamgar wrote:In what instances and applications would I gain from a larger L2 cache size, for example that of the C2D E8400 with 6MB.

This article here explains the role of L2 cache pretty well: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cac ... ,1709.html (personally I think that 2MB is sufficient enough for most applications)

Shamgar wrote:I realise moving over the an Intel P45 platform with discrete graphics will increase power consumption and heat, but I don't think I have anything serious to worry about. I think it would be only a minimal increase.

We are talking about (max) 25W difference, if you go for the NVIDIA GeForce 8400GS.

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:43 am

LodeHacker wrote:ASUS all the way brother, try to get hold of the silent model, which uses the newer G98 core: http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=NamCbx9IwqvXUIog

That model is getting very hard to find now. I can easily get this though.

Thanks for the article link. I will read it with interest.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:44 am

Shamgar wrote:
LodeHacker wrote:ASUS all the way brother, try to get hold of the silent model, which uses the newer G98 core: http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=NamCbx9IwqvXUIog
That model is getting very hard to find now. I can easily get this though.

Thanks for the article link. I will read it with interest.

I really don't know whether that is based on G86 or G98. My take is that the larger heat sink is there to cool the G86, which runs much hotter than the G98 and consumes 38W (max).

Post by **CA_Steve** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:34 am

Your first choice of Pentium e6300 for VT, Gigabyte mobo, and 4350/4550 sound good. The mobo gets a lot of rave reviews. I don't think you need more than what the 4350 provides and it only draws 8W idle/15W 2D. Regarding the Pentium e6300...take a look at the Bench website at Anandtech and directly compare a Pentium e6300 @ 2.8GHz vs a Core 2 Duo e8300 @ 2.83GHz. This will show what the larger cache provides. Then go back and compare vs your current setup

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 8:03 am

the mugen 2 is a better deal than both the xigmatek and the noctua, and it cools a bit better as well... kind of a hassle to install, tho.

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 11:38 am

LodeHacker, I did some searching and it seems the older G86 had a lot of problems with dying cards. G98 is definitely better, but as I can't be sure what I'm getting, looks like I will stick with ATI.

CA_Steve, thanks for the link! I rarely dig deeper through other hardware sites, so thanks for filtering down that useful data. Okay, so the C2D's beat the Pentium E6300 in the benchmarks, but not by a great deal. (They destroy the AMD 4850e though

. The E6300 does also

.) In most of the timed tests, things are not even but within good margin. The larger cache shows its advantage more clearly in the video tests. Whether this would affect me in real use can only be determined if I regularly use the applications those benchmarks represent. It's arguable whether it's worth spending an extra $100 to get the performance boost of a C2D E8400. I guess only I can answer that question.

danimal, Scythe Mugen 2 is just as expensive as Noctua where I live, but I'll look into it. It's heavier than I would like though. There really is no need for heatsinks to weigh close to 1kg just to cool these low power cooler CPUs.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:51 pm

Shamgar wrote:it seems the older G86 had a lot of problems with dying cards

Bullshit. Just because some lazy n00b got his notebook fried doesn't mean NVIDIA did a bad job.

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:08 pm

LodeHacker wrote:
Shamgar wrote:it seems the older G86 had a lot of problems with dying cards
Bullshit. Just because some lazy n00b got his notebook fried doesn't mean NVIDIA did a bad job.

I'm not attacking Nvidia; I'm just mentioning what I have read from other users. Sure, you have to take user feedback with a pinch of salt sometimes. But, as I said earlier, If I can't be sure of what I'm getting, I'll be sticking to what I know. If you didn't mention to me the GPU codes, G86 vs G98, I wouldn't have been aware of the differences.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:10 pm

Shamgar wrote:
LodeHacker wrote:
Shamgar wrote:it seems the older G86 had a lot of problems with dying cards
Bullshit. Just because some lazy n00b got his notebook fried doesn't mean NVIDIA did a bad job.
I'm not attacking Nvidia; I'm just mentioning what I have read from other users. Sure, you have to take user feedback with a pinch of salt sometimes. But, as I said earlier, If I can't be sure of what I'm getting, I'll be sticking to what I know. If you didn't mention to me the GPU codes, G86 vs G98, I wouldn't have been aware of the differences.

I'm fine with whatever you choose, it just makes me sick that because some lazy ass idiot let his notebook overheat suddenly all NVIDIA chips are bad. Don't believe in The Inquirer stories, it's just full bullshit fanboyism.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:18 pm

Looked it up for you, the silent model you can get is G98. I guarantee that, because I have evidence: the G98 supports PCI Express 2.0 unlike the G86 core. Also, the VBIOS file for the ASUS states it has G98 core. I compared against my 8400GS and the core reading is the same. Finally I asked ASUS themselves and it is indeed based on the G98 core. Should you get this and for some unexplained reason have a G86 slapped there, tell me your shipping address and I'll gladly trade my 8400GS for yours. Honest and I'm serious here. Don't let a simple issue like this make you have depression. Also I take it that it is very cheap anyway so do buy it along the Radeon as a hot spare GPU, so should something go wrong with your Radeon at least you can have a picture on your screen without much hassle. On top of that you could make a direct comparison between both to determine the better GPU for you.

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:51 pm

LodeHacker wrote:Looked it up for you, the silent model you can get is G98. I guarantee that, because I have evidence: the G98 supports PCI Express 2.0 unlike the G86 core. Also, the VBIOS file for the ASUS states it has G98 core. I compared against my 8400GS and the core reading is the same. Finally I asked ASUS themselves and it is indeed based on the G98 core. Should you get this and for some unexplained reason have a G86 slapped there, tell me your shipping address and I'll gladly trade my 8400GS for yours. Honest and I'm serious here. Don't let a simple issue like this make you have depression. Also I take it that it is very cheap anyway so do buy it along the Radeon as a hot spare GPU, so should something go wrong with your Radeon at least you can have a picture on your screen without much hassle. On top of that you could make a direct comparison between both to determine the better GPU for you.

I truly commend your investigative effort

. That gives me a good assurance. Especially as I want to give Nvidia a go after many years using ATI. Like you say, I can compare Radeon vs GeForce for myself, and they are both cheap enough to not worry about.

alleycat · Post by **alleycat** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:15 am

Have to admit, I also prefer Nvidia. I've seen a few articles where ATI wins in bang for buck, but I never liked the software that comes with them. Maybe things have changed now, I don't know. For me, Nvidia has been an overall smoother experience.

I agree with your choice of motherboard, as well as the E6300. I would choose a tower heatsink rather than the top down one. That way you will easily be able to cool the CPU fanless, with just a low speed rear exhaust. The Noctua is good value, but you probably won't need the fan.

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:03 pm

alleycat wrote:Have to admit, I also prefer Nvidia. I've seen a few articles where ATI wins in bang for buck, but I never liked the software that comes with them. Maybe things have changed now, I don't know. For me, Nvidia has been an overall smoother experience.

What is it about ATI software in particular that you disklike? I only ever run Catalyst Control Center once to lower the gamma level then I disable it. If I really need to change something else, I load it up manually. It is not the most intuitive software. Is Nvidia's more user friendly?

alleycat wrote:I agree with your choice of motherboard, as well as the E6300. I would choose a tower heatsink rather than the top down one. That way you will easily be able to cool the CPU fanless, with just a low speed rear exhaust. The Noctua is good value, but you probably won't need the fan.

I am still weighing up my CPU and motherboard combination. But it will be between the E6300 or the C2D E8400. Most people here do prefer tower over shelf coolers now. I've always been one to be a bit cautious about motherboard cooling, but I guess that isn't as much an issue as long as there is good airflow management and some undervolting done. Hopefully, the stock motherboard heatsinks do a more than decent job at keeping it cool.

alleycat · Post by **alleycat** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:40 pm

TBH, I can't remember what I specifically didn't like about ATI. I've just been left with the impression that it was a slightly irritating experience, a bit intrusive maybe? I have a very low annoyance threshold. Nvidia seems to just stay out of the way and does everything I expect. Sorry I can't be more specific, I'm not a video card expert! Maybe someone else can shed some light.

I've never worried about chipset temps. My previous system I had for many years ran burning hot, as does my current E5300 system (both have Intel chipsets). I'm sure I read in a review of the GA-EP45-UD3P that the chips stay pretty cool anyway, so I wouldn't bother providing cooling specifically for that purpose.

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 6:26 am

LodeHacker wrote:
Shamgar wrote:
LodeHacker wrote:Bullshit. Just because some lazy n00b got his notebook fried doesn't mean NVIDIA did a bad job.
I'm not attacking Nvidia; I'm just mentioning what I have read from other users. Sure, you have to take user feedback with a pinch of salt sometimes. But, as I said earlier, If I can't be sure of what I'm getting, I'll be sticking to what I know. If you didn't mention to me the GPU codes, G86 vs G98, I wouldn't have been aware of the differences.
I'm fine with whatever you choose, it just makes me sick that because some lazy ass idiot let his notebook overheat suddenly all NVIDIA chips are bad. Don't believe in The Inquirer stories, it's just full bullshit fanboyism.

How about the gigantic ($196 million USD) Nvidia made against the warranty claims and repair costs for those chips, and the ongoing lawsuits with it's own insurance company about the same issue.
It was a real problem, it happens. Might not have been their fault (manufacturing error?), but it's their name that gets the blame.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:19 am

psiu wrote:
LodeHacker wrote:
Shamgar wrote:I'm not attacking Nvidia; I'm just mentioning what I have read from other users. Sure, you have to take user feedback with a pinch of salt sometimes. But, as I said earlier, If I can't be sure of what I'm getting, I'll be sticking to what I know. If you didn't mention to me the GPU codes, G86 vs G98, I wouldn't have been aware of the differences.
I'm fine with whatever you choose, it just makes me sick that because some lazy ass idiot let his notebook overheat suddenly all NVIDIA chips are bad. Don't believe in The Inquirer stories, it's just full bullshit fanboyism.
How about the gigantic ($196 million USD) Nvidia made against the warranty claims and repair costs for those chips, and the ongoing lawsuits with it's own insurance company about the same issue.
It was a real problem, it happens. Might not have been their fault (manufacturing error?), but it's their name that gets the blame.

Look, they did not want unsatisfied customers. Somehow this NVIDIA story is just like this story about a Belgian girl who got tattooed 56 stars on her face then after her father / boyfriend got angry she lied that actually she asked for 3 stars and you probably know the rest; http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8104645.stm and then read http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -them.html similar pattern here? One n00b, one good guy.

Post by **CA_Steve** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:46 am

maybe this thread can be better served helping Shamgar with his build...

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:48 am

CA_Steve wrote:maybe this thread can be better served helping Shamgar with his build...

Maybe, maybe not

Okay, let's turn back on topic, but a lil' off topic spices things up, doesn't it

Shamgar are you considering to overclock your PC (in the near future) to get more bang for the watt? If yes, I would make slight changes to your configuration.

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:32 am

CA_Steve wrote:maybe this thread can be better served helping Shamgar with his build...

OH FINE IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANT IT!

Buy anything yet Shamgar?

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:42 am

CA_Steve wrote:maybe this thread can be better served helping Shamgar with his build...

Hey, I guess it's partly my fault

. I did want to get some opinions on graphics cards for my build. People just get passionate about brands that have served them well and it's only natural. I was once very fervent about AMD and ATI, but I realised how pathethic this behaviour can become. Instead of [fan]boyism, I now try to find a product that best suits my needs.

Everyone who has posted has been helpful so far. It's those one or two opinions that can influence your decisions and give you confidence in what you are doing.

BTW: My proposed build is being made a little difficult at this stage because I am going through some warranty claims with a local retailer. I really want to sort this out first before committing to buying these new parts. The weather here isn't helping either as we are having some winter storms which makes it a bit hard to travel around town to the PC stores. But all in good time.

I am also up in the air a little on which case I should make this build in. Specifically, I want the P18x design with the bottom mounted PSU and separate thermal chambers. I would have gone for a P182 last year, but unfortunately I didn't, and it is near impossible to get through retailers here in Australia as the P183 has effectively replaced it. I could try finding a used P182--but that may prove difficult to do. A P183 would be the only genuine option right now---if the price came down significantly. However, I mentioned here that I want to wait for revision changes before seriously committing to a P183.

I could opt for a P180 Mini which has the core elements of the P182 in a smaller size. But it would mean changing spec to a mATX motherboard which I don't really want to do. I have already decided I will go for a discrete graphics solution. ATX motherboards are far more versatile for what I aim to do. They have better stock availability while often being cheaper than the high-end integrated boards.

Anyway, it may be some time yet before this build of mine gets underway

. After a lot of disappointments with previous builds, I really want to build a computer that I can be proud of and have confidence in. I regard my computer as an investment, and a tool to achieve things with. It's also this sense of belonging factor and gaining the respect of the SPCR community with a good quality "silent" build.

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:13 am

psiu wrote:
CA_Steve wrote:maybe this thread can be better served helping Shamgar with his build...
OH FINE IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANT IT!

Buy anything yet Shamgar?

Read previous post of mine

. As I also mentioned in the start of this topic, I will reuse a lot of parts I already have, most of which is fairly new anyway.

LodeHacker wrote:
CA_Steve wrote:maybe this thread can be better served helping Shamgar with his build...
Maybe, maybe not
Okay, let's turn back on topic, but a lil' off topic spices things up, doesn't it

Some off topic venturing is less boring and predictable. As long as we come back to base. I never did like fully guided tours.

LodeHacker wrote:Shamgar are you considering to overclock your PC (in the near future) to get more bang for the watt?

I have never bothered with overclocking and always regarded it with the highest disdain. But in contemporary computing, it does make sense to get some more "bang for the watt" as you say, since hardware and BIOSes have greatly improved. I will try it, but I won't get myself fussed about it. What is your take? Most of the time, I would not need the extra speed, but maybe during more demanding work like audio production and image editing it will help.

LodeHacker wrote:If yes, I would make slight changes to your configuration.

What changes might these be?

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:57 am

Let me first say that I am not an expert overclocker, but the basics are well understood and I do frequently use an overclocking profile for boosting performance. I have no experience with that Gigabyte, it seems to be a good if not great overclocking board, but the Pentium Dual-Core CPUs will pose a problem to you; with an C2D E8400 you'll likely get past 4Ghz with less voltage for example. The cost/performance ratio is very different though, but I'm just saying that without any tweaks it might be hard to push a Pentium Dual-Core far enough to have a noticeable boost in performance. The other thing is RAM. It will most likely be your next bottleneck if raising the FSB high enough. Kingston Value RAM doesn't like to run at higher speeds, but Kingston HyperX is good for overclocking. I've pushed an 800Mhz CL4 HyperX stick to 1200Mhz with an FSB of 2000Mhz, no problems (except heat, and in that setup the RAM required air cooling as well). Lastly, you won't gain much from overclocking a mid range / low end CPU with a budget graphics card. Consider something in the 9600GT range for NVIDIA, a simple BIOS mod to raise voltages (and if you're talented, memory timing too) then use any software approach to raise the core and memory clocks.

Always glad to help ya, brother

Post by **CA_Steve** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:09 pm

Regarding overclocking...I never bothered until the Intel Core 2 Duo...my e4300 OC'ed from 1.8GHz to 2.4GHz. I replaced it with an e8400 that is barely OC'ed @ 3.15GHz (long story involving old P965 mobo issues). I don't try for highest OC or increasing the Core voltage...just looking to do my own parts binning

Actually, getting the e4300 to 2.4GHz helped a LOT with my apps and gaming. Someday, when a game requires more CPU horsepower, I'll replace this old mobo and OC the e8400 up to 3.6GHz.

The 45nm Intel CPUs have a lot of wiggle room on clock speed. You can always make the trade off of e8400, e6300, OCing and $'s spent.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:17 pm

This baby I got up to 3.3Ghz on air with 1900Mhz FSB: viewtopic.php?t=54245

Top that

Shamgar · Post by **Shamgar** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:21 pm

Will overclocking this system to 4GHz+ make my .rtf s and .pdf s load faster? If so, I will go for watercooling and try for 5GHz

.

Lode, after reading your post, I think I will not focus much on overclocking. Most of my intended work will not require high performance. So I will go for high stock clock speed and generous cache. The board I am considering is a serious overclocking and enthusiasts' board, but those are not my central concerns. It has an excellent set of features that appeal to me and would cost me a lot more if I were to package those components separately.

You said a Pentium Dual Core E6300 would be limited, but in what way? If it can run at 3.0GHz with lower than stock voltage, it would be good enough for me. I've thought of stepping up to C2D E8400, but that is ~$112 more. Regarding RAM, I wanted to get Kingston HyperX, but it was too costly, so I went with VR which was half the cost. In time, I will invest in better RAM when 4/6/8GB+ is feasible and worthwhile. The problem I may have is FSB:DRAM ratio as the CPUs are 1066/1333 to DDR2's 800. I don't know how much this affects performance as I have little experience with this sort of system/BIOS tweaking.

Regarding graphics cards... I only require high quality 2D as I stopped gaming a couple years ago. There are some adventure games I'm interested in, but other than that, I don't have time or desire to play games anymore. So anything more than GeForce 8400 or Radeon 4350 is simply vanity for me. If a budget card higher in the scale presents better efficiency and features for the dollar, I will rethink; but now there is no point in going higher and spending more.

LodeHacker · Post by **LodeHacker** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:17 am

Shamgar wrote:Will overclocking this system to 4GHz+ make my .rtf s and .pdf s load faster? If so, I will go for watercooling and try for 5GHz .

In practice, yes. However, the performance gained will only slightly affect RTF/PDF loading times. Maybe ranging from milliseconds to a few seconds; nothing outstanding.

Shamgar wrote:You said a Pentium Dual Core E6300 would be limited, but in what way?

The architecture of the Pentium differs a bit from its Core 2 counterparts, this will make it more difficult to squeeze performance out of it at the same voltages compared to its Core 2 siblings.

Shamgar wrote:The problem I may have is FSB:DRAM ratio as the CPUs are 1066/1333 to DDR2's 800. I don't know how much this affects performance as I have little experience with this sort of system/BIOS tweaking.

Simple. You must understand that the FSB is quad pumped and DDR2 is dual pumped. This means that an FSB running at 400Mhz will do 4 transfers per second resulting in an effective speed of 1600Mhz. Now if you understood the concept, you would understand that DDR2 800Mhz runs in reality at half the speed, 400Mhz. With this combination, 1600Mhz FSB + DDR2 800Mhz, you are running at an identical I/O bus speed of 400Mhz, resulting to a 1:1 FSB/RAM ratio. This will help the system by reducing latencies between different I/O buses and so give more performance in certain conditions.

Shamgar wrote:Regarding graphics cards... I only require high quality 2D as I stopped gaming a couple years ago.

Same here, but in order to see a real boost in performance with overclocking, you need a slightly more powerful graphics card to help the CPU concentrate on its own tasks and let the graphics card calculate the rest. I am saying this, because lots of applications can utilize the GPU for many calculations, giving the CPU more free room to utilize its processing power.