-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
thinking of going quad
- Thread starter madhatR
- Start date
i didn't read your sig before to notice the 30inch widescreen. i retract my previous statement. 
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2002
i would go with a e6600 to compliment the rest of your setup, plus if the mobo tops out at 430, you'll still be in great shape.
your monitor could warrant SLI'd 8800's. you'd get more of a boost out of that for todays games than you would with a quad.
your monitor could warrant SLI'd 8800's. you'd get more of a boost out of that for todays games than you would with a quad.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2002
Between a E6400 and a E6600, my results at least in 3D renderings and even like 3D Marks at the same speeds (FSB even) my E6400 preforms slightly (minor) better, which I can't figure out but hey thats maybe some luck finally.
If you are able to clock to 3.4Ghz it seems to negate the difference of going higher on the CPU in games, Dom did a nice little article on the front page about it.
Say getting a E6400 or E6600 (your choice) the board get some PC-6400 memory with D9 chips these will be perfect OCers and get you beyond the PC-8000 your looking at. With all that selling your mobo, cpu, ram, should negate the difference for most of the upgrade leaving more room if you do wish to expand to SLI.
Going quad now might not prove as useful as it would in say mid next year with the release of some games. It really depends if you play alot of the newer games coming, video encoding, or rendering that requires the extra processing power.
If you are able to clock to 3.4Ghz it seems to negate the difference of going higher on the CPU in games, Dom did a nice little article on the front page about it.
Say getting a E6400 or E6600 (your choice) the board get some PC-6400 memory with D9 chips these will be perfect OCers and get you beyond the PC-8000 your looking at. With all that selling your mobo, cpu, ram, should negate the difference for most of the upgrade leaving more room if you do wish to expand to SLI.
Going quad now might not prove as useful as it would in say mid next year with the release of some games. It really depends if you play alot of the newer games coming, video encoding, or rendering that requires the extra processing power.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
Iv seen benchmarks and there is NO improvements over quad to duo core (conroe wise). Software is still being made for single/dual core not quad core and probably wont be for a long time.. YOu might need quad core if you have 4 GBS of ram and decide to burn 4 DVDs at once with media coming from 4 different SATA channels without lag.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
what makes people say that the board tops out at 430?
Plenty of people have got it to 500FSB it just takes alot of tweaking, and if your comming from a A64 rig you should already be acustomed to tweaking voltage settings and HTT multi.
Micron D9GMH ram.. pretty well maintained list http://ramlist.ath.cx/ddr2/
E6400 would likely get the job done for gaming.
Plenty of people have got it to 500FSB it just takes alot of tweaking, and if your comming from a A64 rig you should already be acustomed to tweaking voltage settings and HTT multi.
Micron D9GMH ram.. pretty well maintained list http://ramlist.ath.cx/ddr2/
E6400 would likely get the job done for gaming.
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2002
i didn't say the board tops out at 430, i said IF it tops out at 430 (or if you just want a simple easy OC). 
with a e6600, i would probably be dropping the multi to 8 anyways, the only real reason to go e6600 is for the extra cache.
with a e6600, i would probably be dropping the multi to 8 anyways, the only real reason to go e6600 is for the extra cache.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
From looking at the benchmarks the real advantage to the extra cache is file compression performance, not gaming.
So.. unless you do alot of file compression (and in reality, any of the C2D's are flipping fast at that) I really don't see the point of it at this point.
Unless you game superpi
So.. unless you do alot of file compression (and in reality, any of the C2D's are flipping fast at that) I really don't see the point of it at this point.
Unless you game superpi
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2002
hey, if you are already going ALL out on a rig with SLI'd 8800's and such, its nice to be able to do it all, and playing with PI is fun. the diff is really only $~80-90 isn't it?
the diff is really only $~80-90 isn't it?- Joined
- Nov 21, 2006
I've got both...
X6800 at 3.6 gives higher frames on all games I have than the Q6700 at 3.4. I need to move my 7950GX2 back to the X and put the ATi back in the Q...
Although unless you are playing at top res, the difference between 70 fps and 65 fps isn't all that much (I play most games at 1600 x 1200)
X6800 at 3.6 gives higher frames on all games I have than the Q6700 at 3.4. I need to move my 7950GX2 back to the X and put the ATi back in the Q...
Although unless you are playing at top res, the difference between 70 fps and 65 fps isn't all that much (I play most games at 1600 x 1200)
AC3421
Disabled
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2006
- Location
- Santa Monica, California
Asus striker OC's like crap.... http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTIzNCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
EVGA 680i is an awsome OC'er.
Also, the striker has the radiator part of the heatpipes completly around the CPU socket, basically enveloping the CPU/CPU HSF in heat.
EVGA 680i is an awsome OC'er.
Also, the striker has the radiator part of the heatpipes completly around the CPU socket, basically enveloping the CPU/CPU HSF in heat.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
hUMANbEATbOX said:hey, if you are already going ALL out on a rig with SLI'd 8800's and such, its nice to be able to do it all, and playing with PI is fun.
Ok.. I have it on very good athority (Gautam) that the E6600 will bench 3-D better.. Im going to retract my allendale statments in this thread and any other build anything like this (ohh yea, the monster 30" LCD's are EVERYWERE watch out
) ok. that last part was a joke..3.4-3.6 is conservitive madhatR.. I havn't seen anything out there about the striker that makes it better then the evga so I'm going to stick with the cheaper of the two for now (the striker has more extream voltages right in the bios but I see no plans for extream cooling so this is what I'm basing this reco off of)
btw.. the striker just like the evga both don't clock very well if you don't find and use the tweaks found by the better overclockers.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
no reason for quad if your a gamer. period.
![[SC]Ceasar](/forums/data/avatars/m/62/62771.jpg?1626886332){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2005
- Location
- Netherlands
Nice list there maji!greenmaji said:
Some very good info on that site.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2002
greenmaji said:
or the future, Crysis, Alan Wake, Supreme Commander, FSX, and more...
All utilitze quads. Me personally I'm waiting for 45nm before jumping on quads. That should reduce the heatload on them out of the box.
