Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WintersFury

Been hearing things about the new Intel cpu's

Recommended Posts

Guess I'm with Praz on this one....when the cheapest C2D processors available can hit near 100% overclocks on air I'd say we've been catered to.

 

 

I really don't see the problem here.:confused:

 

I've never had any experience with them so I can't say, but the gist I got from the first few posts was that they're not overclocking as well anymore because of FSB walls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's understandable, but when it comes to the overclocking market, a smart company would cater to them, not fight against them. I'm not against binning, but FSB walls?

 

k...but...guess what?

 

THERE IS NO OVERCLOCKING MARKET

 

not in cpu land

 

AMD appreciates enthusiasts, as does Intel (finally). AMD and Intel, however, DO NOT CATER TO OVERCLOCKERS.

 

period

 

zero

 

zilch

 

nada

 

zip

 

nope

 

uh-uh

 

no way

 

I'm with Praz and techno...stop the whining because that is all it is. Mobos and RAMs and GPUs and such might have some overclocking friendly bits...but cpu's have never and never will be advertised in ANY form or way or such with overclocking.

 

That's understandable, but when it comes to the overclocking market, a smart company would cater to them, not fight against them. I'm not against binning, but FSB walls?

 

this is a nonsense statement, especially coming from a bright kid. THERE IS NO OVERCLOCKING MARKET IN CPU's. The only one that exists is the one WE make it out to be.

 

and a SMART company is one that won't warranty any overclocking, won't market anything as overclockable, etc. That is what a SMART company does. If you want to know why that is SMART, look around this forum, or any oc/enthusiast forum on the internet, and see what a whiny bunch of . overclockers are, and how if they don't get their way, they'll roll out the rumors hard, fast, and sometimes destructive (trust me on this one from MUCH personal experience)

 

There is no 'fighting against'. That's rubbish. Total rubbish, and anyone who disagrees needs to have a dose of reality splashed in their face. Some of you guys need to hit the reality coffee machine and get a cup straight black and hot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to find very good to great OCing chips take a look at ebay and the FS threads on many of the popular forums. In the last month I have found no less than 7 chips (4-E6600-L629Bs, 1-E6600-L627B, and 2-Xeon-L631Bs) of which I have purchased 2 that were literally OC monsters. Both will do 3.6GHz with a small bump in vcore. Both will also do 4.0GHz at or near 1.55vcore. Obviously you need some good cooling when you get to 4.0 but the chips are out there if you are willing to do your homework.

 

The batch codes for Xeon-3060 and E6600 you want to look for are (in no particular order):

 

L629B

L627B

L631B

L629F

 

And as usual YMMV but typically these things will give excellent results. Don't be afraid to ask the seller what the batch code is if they don't list it. I got lucky both times in that apparetnly no one noticed what the batch codes were so the bidding didn't go haywire and I even got the L631B Xeon for $160 shipped.

 

And if you wait a little longer the G0 steppings will be available and I hear they are excellent OCers. E6550 (7x), E6750 (8x, which I will go after), and E6850 (9x) are all supposed to OC very well on lower than normal vcore. And since the Q6600 will be about $270 by 07/07 that is something else to consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the G0 chips should be good when they come to market. It's the cycle repeating all over again.

 

Another thing to consider when comparing the performance of chips is the multiplier. No chip is going to equal the FSB performance of X and QX chips. When using multipliers lower the stock with E series chips the NB is overclocked. How much depends on how far away from the native multiplier the chip is being run at. With X and QX chips on most motherboards the native multiplier is seen as whatever it is set at.

 

Up to a point as the FSB is increased the performance is actually a little better with E series chips because of NB overclocking. But past this point the NB gives out. Just one of the benefits of X and QX chips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How is Intel alienating anyone or any market. All current Core2 processors do far in excess of what they are rated at. Why would a person even think they could buy a "weenie" processor and get the same performance as someone who spent $800.00-$1000.00?

 

I realize it's human nature to expect something for nothing. But it gets old reading and listening to people constantly whining because their $200.00 processor won't clock the same as their friend's $600.00 one.

 

I don' think it's "something for nothing", because that $200 CPU isn't just the same as the $600 one. You have to spend time finding the proper cooling(and if you want a crazy OC, mosfet cooling, northbridge cooling, good cpu cooler, etc). You have to find a motherboard that'll let your chip hit a high clock(some ds3s don't do more than 100-200 MHz OC with a quad core, some p35s do 1 GHz+). And you kill your chip faster at that speed. That is the price of overclocking.

 

When you do buy the $600 chip, you're guaranteed that speed, without resorting to ******* with the BIOS and every setting and weird cooling. It just works, you have a warranty. I don't feel bad for someone who has a $1K CPU that performs the same as a $350 one overclocked because he didn't have to do anything to get that.. and that's perfectly fine, but it doesn't mean he wasted $650 by getting that CPU. For him, $650 was worth it so he didn't have to jump through hoops to get that clock speed. I don't think he should feel ripped off that a cheap CPU got the same speed, because the guy that got it had to do more work. Time is money, and experimentation can be money.

 

As far as an overclocking market, I don't see it. Why would a company cater to a market that floods up their RMA department by killing their products? If no one overclocked their CPUs, imagine how many less deaths there'd be of boards, memory, CPUs. Memory companies market memory that technically may require a CPU overclock, but no memory overclock(since it's binned to run at DDR1066). Motherboards have the feature there because for the most part, you're killing the CPU not the board(it's easier to kill the CPU if a dumbass sets 1.8v to a quad core than the mobo if he sets 1.55 mch/1.4 fsb). IMO they have less to worry about. CPU manufacturers, it's easy to kill the CPU.. have some idiot with stock cooling set 1.6v on his quad core with stock cooling, in 2 years it dies, he RMAs it, and intel loses cash. Are they going to break out the 45 nanometer microscope for every RMA to make sure he didn't void his warranty? Hell no, they'll probably replace it, because they can't assume the guy overclocked his CPU.. and it'd cost too much to check everytime. That's lost money for Intel and AMD.

 

I don't think AMD _or_ Intel have embraced the overclocking market. If you really are selling to a specific niche of people, you don't put in the warranty that what this niche market is going to do will void the warranty.

 

There is the other side of the coin. If I didn't know for sure I could get 3.7 GHz out of the e6400 I bought, no way in hell I would have ever upgraded from my AMD. It was a 40% performance increase in applications I use overclocked vs AMD overclocked. If I knew I could only get 2.9 out of the 2.13 GHz CPU, I wouldn't have bought a higher priced Intel, I would have just never bought Intel. My rule is to wait until the new CPU at stock is 10-20% better than the old CPU with the max overclock.. and the intel didn't do that. But I got it because it was cheap for the performance increase.

 

If they produce highly overclockable CPUs, I'm more likely to buy it.

 

I think this kinda relates to the music downloading controversy. Is a download a lost sale, a new sale, or in the middle. Is a highly overclockable $200 CPU a lost sale for the $1000 CPU, a gained sale for the guy who wouldn't upgrade unless a $200 CPU could do that, or no effect? I'd guess a gained sale. When people see a 3.8 GHz e6400 in a thread on XS with prime stability 9 months ago, I think their eyes popped out more than when the 1K CPU did it, and their wallets opened a bit more to the idea of buying one. But that's just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm a total assclown, but I see no prime95 there. Did they even test it? My e6400 did 4.1 on a P5B just fine.. but for stability it needed like 1.6v post vdroop mod for 4 GHz. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why is this 3.92 Ghz nonsense being posted here, XS, and slashdot? Any assclown can do that without a stability benchmark.

 

Let me boot up my q6600 at 4 GHz and impress you with the dnetc keyrate I get for 5 minutes.. look how special I am. I can do the same thing. The thing that should get this posted to many sites is actual proof of stability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe I'm a total assclown, but I see no prime95 there. Did they even test it? My e6400 did 4.1 on a P5B just fine.. but for stability it needed like 1.6v post vdroop mod for 4 GHz. :/

 

 

Too be honest...I'm not sure I've ever read a review where they claimed a processor was Prime/Orthos stable while overclocked...most just OC the crap out of it and run a few 3Dmark tests. I was more interested in the stock numbers and how it performed vs the QX6700

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The e6420's are hitting some pretty good clocks right now. Not so much the e6320's though.

 

I will be putting my new rig together with a DS3 and 6420 tomorrow night. I'll let you know what the initial OC is on stock voltage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Too be honest...I'm not sure I've ever read a review where they claimed a processor was Prime/Orthos stable while overclocked...most just OC the crap out of it and run a few 3Dmark tests. I was more interested in the stock numbers and how it performed vs the QX6700

 

From my experience a 4 GHz dual core got its butt kicked by a 2.4 GHz quad core by about 20% performance wise. It's very application dependent how much the dual got owned, but in every properly multithreaded(xvid != proper multithreading) application, like rc5-72 dnetc.. the quad pulverized the duals. :)

 

I guess overclocking something good enough to run benchmarks gets more people posting the link to the review and more people clicking and more ad revenue. Definitely a reason to read forums and not these stupid ******* reviews. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×