The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

Estuansis Most of the 550 will open up all 4 cores.Mine did along with the 7750. Anyone out there with a socket 939 chip laying around? My 4600 finally went south.

 

Sorry Chris, sold mine to greensman after the supply of working 939 boards in europe dried up.

 

Just spotted this.

and by that logic, nobody will run an X2 550 at 3.87Ghz on a daily basis, so why even mention it?

 

intresting thing, i saw the prices on newegg for the whole i5 line up!

cheapest mobo coming at around $100 ish and the 750 i5, (the 920 without HT and dual channel ram) @ $200 ish.

its very nice! and apparently overclocks with the minimum of 1GHz, and most should hit 4GHz, like the D0 920.

how will AMD combat this?

 

They probably won't combat the overclocking, AMD haven't matched an Intel for overclocking since the pre-Core 2 days, the Phenom II hasn't changed that. However, remember that the stock performance in games for i7s isn't awesome, they rely on overclocking to truly stand out from the current gen in games - and I expect AMD fans will be using that to their full advantage as reasons to go AMD. Should AMD be able to bump their performance up by as little as 20%, Intel could have some serious competition as I doubt they have anything new to break performance barriers any time soon.

 

Sam, Russ,

I think both of you have a solid viewpoint. You each bring up a good defense for your own argument. As far as I see it, AMD = Budget Gamer/OCer, Intel = Enthusiast gamer/OCer. AMD's high end chips are priced extremely well as of right now but Intel's top-end chips perform and OC so much better it's not funny. Remember I have already had 3 Core 2 based CPUs and I will tell you they are superior. This coming from an AMD fan too! But AMD's newest chips offer such a good value that any budget-minded builder should strongly consider them before making the move to Intel. I really think you should just buy what suits you and stop this endless arguing. And don't point fingers because you both contribute.

This is a PC building thread, not a who is better thread. We already saw what happens when you start threads like that...

So let's just discuss the chips based on their individual merits. And if you must compare only consider raw performance vs raw performance and not efficiency or OC percentage or power consumption. People already have taken this into consideration way before deciding to buy the chip. Comparing from AMD to Intel in any technical detail only leads to fighting. Can't we find a happy medium guys?

Yes I am well aware of this but the board it's going into is a 780G SB700 board with no ACC. So whether or not the extra 2 cores are good, I can't unlock them simply because it is not an option on this board. Sorry to hear about your 4600+ though. I hope it died a good death after many years of faithful service

 

This is the thing though, everything said in the first paragraph of your post is exactly the viewpoint I hold. I am totally willing to accept that AMD are a better value option for low budget and basic systems like most of Russ' customers, and frankly most basic users full stop (which is a big share of the market). Businesses, however, which is perhaps the lion's share of the market stand to lose vast sums in power bills by using a lot of AMD's products. One PC with an 80W CPU versus a 50W CPU may not make much difference. 250 machines this spec though, and that's a lot of expense. Remember that businesses do run their CPUs the majority of every day they operate and typically don't upgrade PCs for at least 3 years, sometimes longer.

precisely, and I don't see how what I have contributed says otherwise.
if people are willing not to throw fits when people like me state, what is really the truth about things, I don't see how we should have any problems in this thread. I am tired of having backlashes whenever anything remotely negative is spoken about AMD's products. The main fair criticism of Intel is price, and you will hear no argument from me if people are critical of Intel for that, it's true.

 

Exactly my point though. THIS IS NOT A BUSINESS FORUM. IT IS A FORUM DEDICATED SOLELY TO THE END USER. Every single build discussed on this site is unique and not one of hundreds of identical machines. So your argument is pointless to everyone here. I'm not saying you're wrong, in fact you are 100% right. But you're simply treading water on a subject nobody gives a rat's ass about. We are here for direct performance comparisons and end user experiences.

Yes but my point is every time I check up on this thread there is another argument started. And sorry to say but a lot of it is your stubborn insistence on touting Intel as the more efficient and better OCing chip. EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS THIS. Sure Russ is arguing back but only in defense. Remember he has also used Intel chips and knows full well the strengths and weaknesses of both sides.

So all I'm really asking is to stop the needless squabbling, nitpicking, and arguing. It's getting old and really ruins the thread. AND THIS GOES FOR EVERYONE ELSE AS WELL.

Like I said I'm not attacking anyone because both sides need to lighten up. They're computer components that will be outdated in a few years so I see no need to defend either viewpoint so fiercely...

 

That is what started this argument. I think that is a perfectly fair statement.

 

actually an argurment is started by a rebuttal, no?

anyways 8th of sept, lga 1156 is out. cant wait to see what happeneing with it.

BTW guys if an extrenal 3.5" caddie says the max HDD it supports is a 1TB, then i assume it wont work with a 1.5TB? if so why not?

this is the caddie:

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Icy-...-enclosure-with-USB-20-and-eSATA-Hosinterface

 

It's meant to be an incompatibility with the power draw and the heat output. However, use a 5400rpm eco drive and I don't see where the problem would be.

 

Sam,
Because the 550 will run 24/7 at 3.8+ without any issues! At 4.2 the E8400 has been tough to keep running without water cooling or something like that. The only one I've seen at 4.2GHz all the time, is water cooled. I know a right good many people which have gotten past 4GHz with the E8400, but couldn't get it 100% stable. I think Rob was one of them! Most I've seen, run right around 3.8 to 3.9GHz. After that point the performance curve flattens out. I think Sophocles calls it the point of diminishing returns, or the point you reach where the percentage of improvement going higher diminishes greatly.

Question! Can you adjust the speed and voltage on each core individually on an Intel these days? You can on the AMDs, at least on the newer 790 motherboards. I can boot this one up with all 4 cores showing in the setup, be it won't post past the setup screen, no matter where I set the frequency, voltage or ACC for the other cores.

ChrisC586,
The percentage of 550s opening all 4 cores is about 50%. With the x3 720, it's about 75%. Makes sense to me, as you only have to deal with unlocking one duff core, instead of 2 with the triple. As of yesterday, I know of 4 people that have the 550. Two were able to unlock the two cores, and two were not, which sort of confirms what I've read about them. I'm glad you were able to unlock your 7750. I wish I could completely unlock mine! LOL!! Oh well, there's either a Triple or a Quad in my future anyway!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

No you can't adjust the speed and voltage of each core individually on an Intel, but there's no real need, as the main problem with Intels is the FSB, not the limit of the CPU. That and the fact that Intels will clock further anyway. As for the E8400s, its not too hard, I know someone with an E8500 at 4.3Ghz which I believe can 24/7, gets a bit warm, but not too bad, don't forget E8000s are 65W chips so can go seriously far before they need watercooling. There is someone at aD who has had remarkable results with their E8400 as well.

 

Yeah AFAIK the E8400 can routinely go above 4GHz stable on a good air cooler. They are stupidly good OCers. Not quite like the lower end 1.8GHz chips that crank to 3 and above but still awesome.

I'm sorry if you were talking to me but you quoted ChrisC586.

Remember my board is an AMD 780G board with an SB700 southbridge. It doesn't have ACC at all.

 

mmm...i wonder who that was ? sense...i ran at 4.1ghz all year round at low temps in the cm590 sorry..i butted in on the conversation could'en pass it up...i never been on water cooling...i just keep my house cool and my pc's near the vents...

4.1 stable Russ at low temps you don't remember..I posted it along time ago Rob had his at the same b4 but he Got the CO..I got The EO
one of his Core Temps are stuck ,remember the chips...I have E6750,E8400,E9550 and old Pentium 4 530 oc'd to 3.8(Stable)


and a family member just got me a Q9400 for a surprize birthday gift on the 26th august they did'nt know what to get me they knew..I liked computers and Oc'ing so without asking they bought me that..I'm thankful this will be may Last post for awhile if you need me or need to talk you know how to reach me...

 

Man, what an awesome birthday gift! I think you need to come back and tell us how well it overclocks, to dispell the Biostar quad core overclocking myths!

 

i dont like argurments i dont cause

 

I don't like arguments I get blamed for that I never intended to start in the first place.

 

LOL

 

Sam,
And I've pointed out that it is not a fair statement at all. Every time you mention AMD it's like someone stuck a smelly turd under your nose! I've shown links where the 550BE is very competitive with the E8000 series and should be considered a good choice for gaming.

As far as business machines go, they could always go back to calculators and pencil and paper. LOL!! But that would actually increase business expense because of the additional time needed, so efficiency would go down. Only the largest corporations are able to upgrade every few years. The majority of businesses have far older computers. Most companies have no real use for dual cores, let alone quads. You don't need that much power to run office apps! I've been to so many different component manufacturers around here, because they are local to me, and I have constantly been shocked by the lack of high tech in what they use for their own offices compared to what they sell! Mostly of single core Pentiums or Athlons too! In fact the single core is virtually dead even with the C2Q in sales of Intel CPUs, at 18%. The only thing Intel has that sells better is the C2D!

Another issue you seem to have is mentioning 50w CPUs. I know you are going to say that the 65w chips really only use 50w. There must be some reason they are rated at 65w and up, as it would very much be to Intel's advantage to be able to advertise them as 50w chips. The only CPUs that Intel makes that use less than 65w are all single core! Hey, Intel rated them, I didn't!

Estuansis is right. I have had both a modern C2D and a modern AMD x2. I've compared them, and functionally, in real world use, the 7750BE AMD is the better machine for my purposes. The only place that my AMD is lacking is using Win.rar! Since I rarely zip up files large enough to complain about the time it takes to do it, I can live with that! If mine wasn't doing the job, I would be replacing it with something that would! After all, I'm still an enthusiast!

Russ