2.4c or 2.6c ...

[Mac]

I'm wondering if its worth it to go with a 2.6c rather than a 2.4c to get a higher end oc speed.

with 2.4c im thinking 3.3ghz

if i got 2.6c im thinking i could go to 3.5ghz (which might not be possible on a 2.4c but possible on a 2.6c)

hope you understand my question..

[Zuzzz]

check the siggy,. , , , , 2.6

[batboy]

Actually, the 2.4C and 2.6C both top out (on average) about the same. The advantage to the 2.6C is PC3500 RAM works very well with it so that you hit a sweet spot using the 5:4 memory ratio. The 2.4C has the advantage of a little higher FSB and now with PC3700 and PC4000 RAM more readily available, you can have high memory bandwidth too. Hitting 3.5 gig is still a big gamble with both 2.4C or 2.6C.

[flapperhead]

went thru the same obsessing myself. the 2.4 and 2.6 oc similarly. but decided i wanted the highest fsb- mem speed i could get. and the 2.4 is best for that...

[Mac]

hmm thanks for the info, btw i have pc3200, so it looks like i missed out on taking the advantage of either processor memory wise according to batboy :)

[batboy]

If you're using PC3200, then you'll either want the 2.4C and use the 3:2 ratio or get a 2.8C and use the 5:4 ratio. Remember, you'll need two sticks to run dual channel DDR mode.

[Mac]

if it doesnt take too much time/effort, can you explain to me why those processors are good with those specific ratios, or send me to a link that does explain?

[batboy]

I'm calculating the DDR (memory) speed from typical FSB speeds that can be expected with those CPUs.

[j2me_tech]

i'll get a 2.6c over the 2.4c for it's higher multiplier.
cheers http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/images/smilies/toast.gif
keith

[Mac]

from what ive read a higher fsb is better than a higher multiplier, but whatever floats your boat :)

[j2me_tech]

Originally posted by Mac
from what ive read a higher fsb is better than a higher multiplier, but whatever floats your boat :)

alright, i'll choose the 2.6c over the 2.4c since it has higher multiplier which i can obtain higher clock speed with lower fsb. eg for a 2.4c to hit 3.6ghz, it'll need 300fsb which it's kinda high & not every sdale/cwood board can maintain the stability at this fsb. but for a 2.6c to hit 3.6ghz, it'll need only 277fsb which it's common that most of the sdale/cwood will be able to run flawlessly at this fsb without any special cooling on nb :)
cheers http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/images/smilies/toast.gif
keith

[Mac]

what kind of cooling you gonna use?

[(HR)Titan]

i prefer 2.4c cose it's cheper
but u can have same results like with 2.6c
;)

[#18]

check out the CPU data base, 2.4C average oc to 3.3GHZ, 2.6C average is around 3.4GHZ. Average 100MHZ difference. Note here, average people use stock cooling = better cooling may give higher than average overclocking resault.

[j2me_tech]

Originally posted by Mac
what kind of cooling you gonna use?

i'm using slk900u with 92mm tornado ;)
cheershttp://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/images/smilies/toast.gif
keith

[(HR)Titan]

thats good air cooling

[azns_kickass]

If you can afford it, a 2.6C would probably be better than a 2.4C if you want a ~3.5GHz overclock.

Firstly, not all boards can handle near 300FSBs very well. Many top out between 260 - 280MHz. Improved NB cooling may help, but not always.

Secondly, the RAM that can actually run at PC4000 speeds, all have poor timings. From what I've seen, it is better to run the RAM at slightly lower speeds, but at tighter timings.

So PC3500 @ 2-2-2-6 is probably better than PC4000 @ 2.5-3-3-7.

So my vote goes to the 2.6C.

[batboy]

Some of y'all are making excellent points about the RAM timings and the fact that not all mobos like extremely high FSB. However, I'm not totally convinced that the 2.6C will guarantee 100 MHz more clock speed.

I already have a 2.4C and a 2.8C, maybe I should get a 2.6C also and make a direct comparison. Might be sort of interesting to play with all three CPUs up close and in person.

[Mac]

thanks for the info so far

Secondly, the RAM that can actually run at PC4000 speeds, all have poor timings. From what I've seen, it is better to run the RAM at slightly lower speeds, but at tighter timings.
So PC3500 @ 2-2-2-6 is probably better than PC4000 @ 2.5-3-3-7.


cool but whats this got to do with picking a 2.6c over a 2.4c?

[azns_kickass]

Because if you want to reach 3.5GHz with a 2.4C, you'll need PC3700/PC4000 RAM. And usually, such RAM have pretty poor timings.

Which is why a 2.6C @ 3.5GHz w/PC3500 @ 2-2-2-6 would probably be a better choice.

[Mac]

hmm, i think i understand that. Is it becuase pc3200 is too slow to handle such an overclock ??

[batboy]

You can use PC3200 with a 2.4C, but you'll have to run it at the lower 3:2 ratio.

For example: let's say you're very lucky and get a 2.4C that does 3.4 gig (that's 283 FSB). With PC3200 RAM, if you try using the 5:4 ratio the memory speed is DDR453. Since the RAM is only rated at DDR400 you can clearly see that won't work. So, you'll have to drop down to the 3:2 ratio which gives you DDR377. Even PC3500 RAM won't run DDR453 in dual channel mode.

But, if you have the 2.6C and PC3500 RAM, the same 3.4 gig is 261 FSB (if we round up a little). Using the 5:4 ratio will give you DDR418. The PC3500 is rated at DDR433, so you'll be good to go at that speed, plus you can use aggressive timings. Since you're at DDR418 compared to the 2.4C with PC3200 RAM at 3:2 ratio that is at DDR377, you gain quite a bit of memory bandwidth.

The only problem with this theory is the 2,4C has higher FSB which will probably make up the performance difference of having less memory bandwidth. Trouble is, some mobos might not handle 283 FSB and some 2.4C CPU won't do 3.4 gig. On the other side of the coin, if you use good PC3700 RAM which is more expensive, but is rated at DDR466, then you might be able to run the 2.4C using the 5:4 ratio (DDR453 in this example) with a little luck.

All depends on how much cash you have to burn, how much performance you want, and how much you want to push the overclock. Do you feel lucky?

[Mac]

god i hope i win the lotto :)

[xcelerator]

2.4c i kan't wait! with the is7-e mobo