|
|
|
The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition
|
|
|
Any Flaming Results in a Temp Ban or Worse. Your Choice!!!
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 08:18 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Mrk: I've used the hairdryer method to remove a backplate (primarily due to the fact that the HAF932's main design flaw means you need three hands to install a cooler backplate - so I just used the adhesive instead), but it didn't cause the board any damage when it was removed, not that I could see. As for cold solder joints, the required temperature may be 25ºC or so, but it could be 75ºC in which case the component would never work again and you'd RMA it saying it's dead. Depends on the size of the problem.
Jeff: The 550BEs are about the fastest dual core chips AMD have offered, and while not rivals to the E8000 series, for the price they're one of the best value dual core chips out there, for non-enthusiasts. Obviously when you consider overclocking like all high end AMD CPUs they're rather useless, but still good enough for midrange gaming PCs.
Russ: Faulty I/O controller perhaps? Has he tried using different S-ATA ports? Could also potentially try using a PCI IDE or PCI S-ATA card to isolate them and see if that helps...
Sam,
I'm not sure where you are getting your information, but according to a number of reviews I read the xII 550 does a pretty good job competing with the E8400! Here's one review!
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/pii550/
Of the 12 games tested, it was faster at 3, and quite even at 5 more. It was also better at Win.rar and PC mark Vantage and is very close at Cinebench! It also overclocks very well, so I'm puzzled why you say that they are rather useless at overclocking! Neoseekers had no difficulty getting it to 3.857GHz with air cooling. Voltages and temperatures were no issue, and it runs quite cool!
The motherboard on Adam's computer is a new replacement he found in a socket 939, to replace his old MB that went south! The Sata ports are 3.0, and the jumper is was removed. I've never used anything but on board Sata, so I don't own a Sata card and I ain't about to buy one! LOL!! I'll get over there in a day or two and see what I can do. I'm familiar with that particular BioStar MB, as I used the same MB for the first AMD I built for Russell. Thanks though, I do appreciate the feedback.
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 |
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 08:28 |
Link to this message
|
Comparing from an objective standpoint, rather than a pro-AMD standpoint, and ignoring meaningless artificial tests - it sits behind in both Handbrake and POV-Ray, marginally behind in Cinebench.
The only area the X2 550 really does well in is WinRAR, which most of the time is disk-limited anyway.
Most of the games tests are GPU-limited, or the fps is too high anyway to matter, World in conflict is one such example. Lost planet is another example, the 550 fares better here, but is behind where it matters (minimum frame rates, not average),
The E8400 squeezes ahead in Crysis Warhead. The 550 wins Bioshock by a small amount (5%), but at such high FPS that it's an irrelevant test. The E8400 performs noticeably better at COD:WAW, and the X2 550 is marginally ahead in Far Cry 2 and Left 4 Dead - the latter of which is again at too high a frame rate to be worthwhile.
Therefore, in all the tests that matter, the 550 only wins at WinRAR and Far Cry 2, and that's it. Given all the other tests, I'd say the 550 is not on a par with the E8400.
Also, overclocks well. Once again, from an objevtive standpoint - the E8400 will clock to 4.2Ghz in most systems, 40%. The 550 will make 3.87 you say, 25% at the most. The E8400 is in a different league, which is why it costs so much more. The X2 550 vs E7500 is a much fairer fight, hence the similar costs.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 09:40 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Comparing from an objective standpoint, rather than a pro-AMD standpoint, and ignoring meaningless artificial tests - it sits behind in both Handbrake and POV-Ray, marginally behind in Cinebench.
The only area the X2 550 really does well in is WinRAR, which most of the time is disk-limited anyway.
Most of the games tests are GPU-limited, or the fps is too high anyway to matter, World in conflict is one such example. Lost planet is another example, the 550 fares better here, but is behind where it matters (minimum frame rates, not average),
The E8400 squeezes ahead in Crysis Warhead. The 550 wins Bioshock by a small amount (5%), but at such high FPS that it's an irrelevant test. The E8400 performs noticeably better at COD:WAW, and the X2 550 is marginally ahead in Far Cry 2 and Left 4 Dead - the latter of which is again at too high a frame rate to be worthwhile.
Therefore, in all the tests that matter, the 550 only wins at WinRAR and Far Cry 2, and that's it. Given all the other tests, I'd say the 550 is not on a par with the E8400.
Also, overclocks well. Once again, from an objevtive standpoint - the E8400 will clock to 4.2Ghz in most systems, 40%. The 550 will make 3.87 you say, 25% at the most. The E8400 is in a different league, which is why it costs so much more. The X2 550 vs E7500 is a much fairer fight, hence the similar costs.
Sam,
Let's face it, you just don't like AMD! You sit there and say "from an objective standpoint", while you claim that my viewpoint is Pro AMD. You say the 550 doesn't compete with the 8000 series, but it does. It does a nice job against a superior and more expensive E8400, so it must do even better against an E8200. No one is going to run an E8400 at 4.2GHz on a daily basis, so why even mention it? And who gives a rat's behind about the frame rates being too high? They all had the same video card, so what's the difference. A win is still a win!
I know how much you love Anandtech, so I'll spare you the whole article and skip to the conclusions!
Quote:
Realistically the difference between the X2 250 and X2 550 performance wise is roughly 10%. The one thing that this article showed was that for gamers, the Phenom II X2 processor definitely is the way to go.
More interesting I find to be the fact that the Phenom II X2 550 BE is coming awfully close in performance to the 165 USD Core 2 Duo E8400 processor from Intel.
Let's face it, You just don't want to give credit where credit is due! Anandtech and others say it's the way to go if you are a gamer. If the E8400 is in a different league, then how come the 550 is rated so high when it comes to gaming? Is the E8400s margin in extra performance worth the $65 price difference? Not if you are a gamer!
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 09:59 |
Link to this message
|
It's not that I don't like AMD, it's more that I see their new processors for what they are. Everyone else seems so spellbound with the comeback that AMD have made that they tend not to consider the facts too seriously. The fact is, for standard end users that want a good value CPU, the new AMDs are hard to beat simply because they are so aggressively priced. However, the long and short of it is that the AMDs from a technological standpoint are still behind the current Intels. They simp;y stand up in the market because they are well priced, which is to AMD's credit. For performance enthusiasts though, even on not too large a budget, the innate performance advantage through overclocking an Intel is hard to ignore, as is in some cases the difference is in efficiency, and thus suitability for low power or low heat or low noise platforms. I can turn every case fan in my work PC off entirely, the CPU cooler is already fanless, and it will still run cool enough that I can overclock it by maybe as much as 40-45% and OCCT it 24 hours a day without it overheating. That's something you simply can't do with an AMD CPU, and better yet, I paid about £55 for that CPU.
The E8200 CPU is pretty much a dead concept, and you should know it by now, as it was introduced long before the better value E7 series which has since replaced them.
Originally posted by theonejrs:
And who gives a rat's behind about the frame rates being too high? They all had the same video card, so what's the difference. A win is still a win!
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You are so focused on making sure everyone knows that AMD are the new best thing that you are zoned in on every little test that comes out in AMD's favour, whether or not it's remotely relevant. Not being a gamer this may not occur to you, but if the only game the AMD CPU is better at is one where it gets 140fps versus Intel's 120, what's the point? Surely you realise that nobody will ever be able to tell the difference between them? They may as well be identical. Any properly setup CPU test uses the maximum detail but minimal resolution to make sure the CPU is stressed as much as it will ever be, but to minimise load on the graphics card - this looks to be how the test you posted was run, the CPU will never be any more limiting than those figures there. Thus, any game posting figures like that is irrelevant for this purpose. It can give a roughly objevtive comparison between it and lesser CPUs from the same series that perhaps would be limiting, but that is it. This is partly why the minimum frame rate should be posted.
As you may have noticed, I never recommend the E8400 CPU to anyone, because I think it's overpriced. I will either choose E5 or E7 series CPUs, or quad cores, or, if people already have an AMD architecture, will sell them the X2 550.
I would give credit to AMD here if it was due, but it is not due to AMD any more than it would be to Intel, neither is it worth giving Intel more than it is AMD, this is after all, unlike yours, an objective standpoint.
|
Member
|
6. September 2009 @ 10:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hear, hear!
(What were we saying about short posts :L)
I could put something funny here but I cant be arsed. Now GO AWAY! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. September 2009 @ 10:05
|
Senior Member
|
6. September 2009 @ 10:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 10:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
:(
Sorry Chris, sold mine to greensman after the supply of working 939 boards in europe dried up.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 12:01 |
Link to this message
|
Just spotted this.
Originally posted by theonejrs:
No one is going to run an E8400 at 4.2GHz on a daily basis, so why even mention it?
and by that logic, nobody will run an X2 550 at 3.87Ghz on a daily basis, so why even mention it?
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 12:07 |
Link to this message
|
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?
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|. |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 12:18 |
Link to this message
|
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 13:15 |
Link to this message
|
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?
Quote:
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.
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 :(
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 13:39 |
Link to this message
|
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.
Originally posted by Estuansis:
This is a PC building thread, not a who is better thread.
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 14:07 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
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.
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.
Quote:
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.
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...
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 14:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by me:
Jeff: The 550BEs are about the fastest dual core chips AMD have offered, and while not rivals to the E8000 series, for the price they're one of the best value dual core chips out there, for non-enthusiasts. Obviously when you consider overclocking like all high end AMD CPUs they're rather useless, but still good enough for midrange gaming PCs.
That is what started this argument. I think that is a perfectly fair statement.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 14:27 |
Link to this message
|
actually an argurment is started by a rebuttal, no? :P
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-Box-I...TA-Hosinterface
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 14:34 |
Link to this message
|
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 18:05 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Just spotted this.
Originally posted by theonejrs:
No one is going to run an E8400 at 4.2GHz on a daily basis, so why even mention it?
and by that logic, nobody will run an X2 550 at 3.87Ghz on a daily basis, so why even mention it?
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.
Quote:
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.
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
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. September 2009 @ 19:39
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 18:07 |
Link to this message
|
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 18:29 |
Link to this message
|
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.
Quote:
Quote:
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.
Estuansis,
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!
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.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. September 2009 @ 18:30
|
|
bigwill68
Suspended permanently
|
6. September 2009 @ 19:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
There is someone at aD who has had remarkable results with their E8400 as well.
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...
Originally posted by Russ:
Wrote:
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!
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...
Done out of Here!
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 19:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
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!
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 19:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
i dont like argurments i dont cause :(
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 19:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don't like arguments I get blamed for that I never intended to start in the first place.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 19:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
LOL
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. September 2009 @ 19:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
The 550BEs are about the fastest dual core chips AMD have offered, and while not rivals to the E8000 series, for the price they're one of the best value dual core chips out there, for non-enthusiasts. Obviously when you consider overclocking like all high end AMD CPUs they're rather useless, but still good enough for midrange gaming PCs.
That is what started this argument. I think that is a perfectly fair statement.
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
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
|
