I've seen several 500 FSB performances with the P5K Deluxe, but I haven't seen anything that high with the P5K basic yet. Is the basic P5K less of an overclocker or has this speed just not been tried yet by the right overclocker? Holding off on a purchase until I know.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
P5K basic vs. P5K Deluxe
- Thread starter Papafox
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
I don't know if its important to you or not but there is no matrix raid on the vanilla.
- Thread Starter
- #4
No need for a fancy raid here.
It wouldn't be tough to test the FSB performance of the vanilla P5K. Setting your CPU's multiplier to 6 and finding a ratio multiplier that works with your memory should allow a basic P5K owner to test the edge of the envelope. Any takers?
It wouldn't be tough to test the FSB performance of the vanilla P5K. Setting your CPU's multiplier to 6 and finding a ratio multiplier that works with your memory should allow a basic P5K owner to test the edge of the envelope. Any takers?
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2007
- Location
- Chicago, IL
I've been playing around with my friend's P5K and I can't get it past 460FSB. NB and FSB Termination maxed out, Vcore at 1.50 BIOS, 1.48 WinXP. BIOS 0202, will update BIOS tomorrow and see if it changes anything.
- Joined
- May 6, 2001
- Location
- HOT 'n Arizona
Check out the p5k-E.. It's got most of what the deluxe has but cheaper.
Suprchargd, what kind of cooling/cpu temps? I had to pump up the vcore to 1.575 to hit 470, but I have h2o and low temps..
Suprchargd, what kind of cooling/cpu temps? I had to pump up the vcore to 1.575 to hit 470, but I have h2o and low temps..
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2007
- Location
- Chicago, IL
AC Freezer 7. At the x7 multi 460fsb I hit 64C at 84F ambient temp. That is with QFan on, so I have a bit more to go if I run the heatsink's fan full speed.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2003
- Location
- Smyrna, TN
the deluxe as well as the vanilla seem to clock up above 500 easily, of course it all depends on the chip more than anything, here's a not so usual board, but gives an idea as well as this one
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2007
- Location
- Chicago, IL
Yes I've seen all the reports, but even at x6 multi and 1.55v 460fsb is the only stable configuration. 462 gets into Windows but fails Orthos around 20 seconds.
- Joined
- May 31, 2004
Given that overclocking the E6600 to 3.8 ghz (Q6600 = 3.4) is unusual and that the best processor speed is obtained at maximum multiplier, then the most useful FSB is about 420 (Q = 375).....
So why is a p5k, at twice the price, better than a DS3 which can already hit 420 easily? And why would you buy a p5k3 to use ddr3 when you can't make use of the faster memory?
Just asking because I want a p5k but am having trouble justifying it when you can get DS3 for cheap.
So why is a p5k, at twice the price, better than a DS3 which can already hit 420 easily? And why would you buy a p5k3 to use ddr3 when you can't make use of the faster memory?
Just asking because I want a p5k but am having trouble justifying it when you can get DS3 for cheap.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2006
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA
True The DS3 and the P5K's oc's just about the same but the P5K would save you a board upgrade IF you decide to get a Penryn later.
Now as to which version to get, its not advisable to get the DDR3 version right now (if there are any available) coz they cost too much, it's immature and doesnt offer much of an improvement over DDR2 YET
Now as to which version to get, its not advisable to get the DDR3 version right now (if there are any available) coz they cost too much, it's immature and doesnt offer much of an improvement over DDR2 YET
- Joined
- May 31, 2004
BLOOP! said:
Even if the Penryn is 25% faster, it will be at least twice as expensive as the soon to be "cheap" Q6600 (if not 3x more) and if you spend twice as much on the mobo as well you are investing a hunk of change for only 25% more speed.
The latest reports say Penryn is a bit over 20% faster than a QX6800 2.93, so that makes the Penryn about 25% faster than a 2.4 Q6600 and no guarantees about how far Penryn can be OCed. Doesn't seem like a good enough trade to give up cheap for speed in a quad core. Especially considering most software can't even make the quad hum a good tune yet.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2006
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA
People sure does have different views and never will agree on one. You have a good point and I cant argue with that. 
But for me,I would never buy something thats a year old when theres a new one out. Of course it still depends on my budget.
But then thats just me.
brother
But for me,I would never buy something thats a year old when theres a new one out. Of course it still depends on my budget.
But then thats just me.
brotherorion456 said:Except for bragging rights or the joy of blowing cash, I don't see the point in spending a lot more to get a bit extra. I want to spend more and get more, preferably a lot more!
Sounds like the best thing for you to do is to wait until the items in question
become available for benching.....then you can better judge your expenditure.
- Thread Starter
- #18
The Vanilla P5K doesn't cost much more than a DS3, but it can take the Penryn cpu at a later date. My expectations are that the Penryn will run cooler than the Canoe CPUs at the same speed. So, I can get a quad-core Penryn, and run it at over 3GB speed. Right now liquid-cooling is pretty much required for running quads over 3GB, but the Penryn might be cool enough to run on air at that speed, given its .45 micron specs.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Location
- Vancouver, Canada
a bit off topic, but does the p5k-3 have 8-phase?
- Joined
- May 14, 2005
- Location
- Warner Robins, Ga
