Thinking of upgrading my computer...

[LivingGhost]

I'm getting a bit tired of my 4200+ et al. So, what's the best overclocking motherboard (I'm assuming DFI, P35? 680i? ICFX3200?), socket (I'm assuming LGA 775 is still on top), processor, and ram. I can't really see what else I would need.

 

I don't really have a budget, but I'd like to keep it around $1000.

 

Or are new, better processors supposed to come out soon?

 

Thanks.

 

Edit: How about this?

CORSAIR Dominator 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1142 (PC2 9136) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X2048-9136C5D - Retail

DFI LP UT P35 T2R LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80557E6850 - Retail

 

What's the best heatsink around, that crazy Thermalright one?

Edited October 13, 2007 by LivingGhost

[kingdingeling]

DFI P35 T2R or the DFI 680i board would be my choice as of right now Combined with either an E6750 or an E6850 and 2GB of decent DDR2 you should be well underway through the newer demos

[LivingGhost]

Well, which is better, P35 or 680i?

 

Also, why is the E6700 more expensive than the E6850?

 

Edit:

 

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.p...st&p=723342

 

I guess I'll wait until January. I do plan on using Server 2008, so would it actually be worth it to go quad-core (Q9450) or keep dual-core (E8500)?

 

Basically all I use my computer for are, video games, internet, Photoshop, Fireworks, text-editors, and various compilers, but I also multi-task, a lot.

Edited October 14, 2007 by LivingGhost

[LivingGhost]

No one cares about my thread.

[capthowdy575]

i would just pick up a E6750 either the dfi p35 or the evga 680i i would go with the dfi also i would get a set of gskill hz

[suchuwato]

DFI P35 + 6750/6850 + g.skill hz / ocz reaper

[road-runner]

Well, which is better, P35 or 680i?

 

Also, why is the E6700 more expensive than the E6850?

 

Edit:

 

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.p...st&p=723342

 

I guess I'll wait until January. I do plan on using Server 2008, so would it actually be worth it to go quad-core (Q9450) or keep dual-core (E8500)?

 

Basically all I use my computer for are, video games, internet, Photoshop, Fireworks, text-editors, and various compilers, but I also multi-task, a lot.

P35 is better, the only reason to go with a 680i would be for sli. The reason the 6700 is more expensive is because retailers want the money they had to pay for the chip when they bought it.

[LivingGhost]

Would I see better performance from dual FX-74's (socket 1207FX) or an overclocked E6850/Q9450?

[Bleeble]

Would I see better performance from dual FX-74's (socket 1207FX) or an overclocked E6850/Q9450?

An extremely vague question with an equally vague answer: It depends...

 

If you use a lot of SMP apps or have ungodly amounts of programs running at once, the dual CPU system will give you much better performance. But based on your previously-stated intended usage, I really don't think it's worth the money you're going to spend. And good luck finding a dual CPU mobo that'll let you overclock.

[LivingGhost]

That's why I didn't specify overclocking when I was talking about the FX-74's. (The only non-server mobo I could find for them on newegg was an ASUS L1N64-SLI 680a.) Also, I specified them in the first place because it would be 2x 2 cores, and the Q9450 is a quad core. I know, they're different, but still...

 

The only SMP apps I plan on running are future games that support it (I know Crysis supports multiple cores, I'm not quite sure if that's the same thing). But I do do a nice amount of encoding (and multitasking).

[Bleeble]

That's why I didn't specify overclocking when I was talking about the FX-74's. (The only non-server mobo I could find for them on newegg was an ASUS L1N64-SLI 680a.) Also, I specified them in the first place because it would be 2x 2 cores, and the Q9450 is a quad core. I know, they're different, but still...

 

The only SMP apps I plan on running are future games that support it (I know Crysis supports multiple cores, I'm not quite sure if that's the same thing). But I do do a nice amount of encoding (and multitasking).

As far as SMP programs are concerned, I don't think there's any significant difference between a quad core and two dual cores. I know that dual CPU server boards have different banks of memory for each CPU and all that nonsense, but I'm talking about performance differences.

 

From my point of view, I think it'd be a heck of a lot more fun to get a 45nm quad and OC it.

 

EDIT: And if having 5-10 programs open at once is considered multi-tasking, then that shouldn't even enter into the equation. But if you're multi-tasking is encoding audio, watching HD movies, running folding, SETI, and WCG, and playing Crysis, then that's a different matter altogether.

Edited November 13, 2007 by Bleeble

[LivingGhost]

But if you're multi-tasking is encoding audio, watching HD movies, running folding, SETI, and WCG, and playing Crysis, then that's a different matter altogether.

That's more-or-less what I would consider multitasking, although I wouldn't watch a movie and play a game at the same time.