- Joined
- May 25, 2008
Removed
**Removed**
**Removed**
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
[Raccoon]18th Birthday Build
- Thread starter OoozeSheep
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2006
For around £600 that's a pretty dam good build .. Check out Scan for stuff a little cheaper (sometimes) ..
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
Why a Q6700, you'd probably be better off with a cheaper Q6600
Also, why 2x 250gb? you'd also be better off with a WD6400AAKS
That knocks about 50 quid off your system.
Also, i would buy the RAM from OcUk, they have horrible service but scan and ebuyer don't have a good selection of RAM, if something goes wrong you can RMA to manufacturer.
One more thing, how high do you plan Ocing? Unless you're going above 3.6ghz (which i don't think would run very cool with a zalman 9700) you really don't need that set of pc2-8500, you can go with a cheaper set of pc2-6400 (I would try and find a set but OcUk's site is so slow >_>)
Also, why 2x 250gb? you'd also be better off with a WD6400AAKS
That knocks about 50 quid off your system.
Also, i would buy the RAM from OcUk, they have horrible service but scan and ebuyer don't have a good selection of RAM, if something goes wrong you can RMA to manufacturer.
One more thing, how high do you plan Ocing? Unless you're going above 3.6ghz (which i don't think would run very cool with a zalman 9700) you really don't need that set of pc2-8500, you can go with a cheaper set of pc2-6400 (I would try and find a set but OcUk's site is so slow >_>)
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
You totally jinxed OcUk's website, when i was using it just now the homepage would load up fast, but all the categories such as memory would just time out when i clicked them, now it works 
Also, scan do sell q6600 G0s, so you can get one from them, not sure why you prefer a cpu which is less common though :s
Also, scan do sell q6600 G0s, so you can get one from them, not sure why you prefer a cpu which is less common though :s
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
I am going to side with Az00123 on this one. The Q6700 is going to gain you nothing over a Q6600. They will both do 43.4 easily, it just doesn't make sense to spend more money just to have something different. Put somewhere where it will make a difference, your HD's for example. The 640 will give better performance than the 320. Again with the RAM PC6400 would be fine. You simply are not going to be hitting north of 500Mhz FSB on a kentsfield. Running on a divider to get to 1066 isn't going to get you anything except, maybe, in benchmarks.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
Look at the benches, the 640's are faster. I am well aware that they both use 320GB platters, I never said a thing about platter density.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
idk about single vs dual platter, but i do believe barely any of the uk e-tailers give you the full model name of the 320gb WD hdds, so you may get one of the older hdds without a 320gb single platter, which is why i went 7200.11 320gb.
Also, i really don't see how a q6700 will make your system different, you want to be different in forum sigs? nobody is going to see the chip once it's built.
How about you spend the money on other stuff, such as a hdd, also case modding isn't usually very expensive and it can make your build different and cool
Also, i really don't see how a q6700 will make your system different, you want to be different in forum sigs? nobody is going to see the chip once it's built.
How about you spend the money on other stuff, such as a hdd, also case modding isn't usually very expensive and it can make your build different and cool
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
That still is not enough to do water correctly. You would be better off sticking with air. Typically when water is done on a low budget the results are mediocre at best. With the advancement of high end air cooling low buck water has become pretty pointless as the reults are similar at best with much more complication.
Going into your discussion on duals and quads, what is this system going to be used for? No sense getting a quad unless you'll really use it.
Going into your discussion on duals and quads, what is this system going to be used for? No sense getting a quad unless you'll really use it.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
I am not familiar with the requirements of that game so I can't really say but for the rest of the programs you would be fine with a dual.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
That would still be fine on a dual, not counting the game. If it is CPU intensive then you may very well benefit from the dual. The rest of that stuff could run simultaneously very comfortably on a dual. I am not trying to talk you out a quad by any means. If thats what you want go for it, just trying to save you a bit of extra heat and power use if you don't.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
Vista does a pretty good job balancing across the cores but most of the apps listed are not intensive at all minus the game. Instead of two idle cores you have four. I have very similair uses as you and mine stays idle a large portion of the time. I do a pretty good amount of encoding is why I went with the quad.
I would stay away from the F1. I have heard way to many reports of them going bad, the 750GB model in particular.
If you do decide to go with a dual, drop down to an E8400. Very much like the Q6700 vs Q6600 your not gaining much besides a lighter wallet.
I think you have you ram speeds and FSB a little mixed up. The 1066 of the chip refers to intel's "quad pumped" numbers which ends up being 266Mhz FSB speed. The "1066" of the RAM refers to the "double data rate" of 533Mhz FSB speed, which the quad will not hit. Your chip will likely hit a wall around 475Mhz actual FSB, or 950Mhz in DDR2 terms, or 1900Mhz in Intel's quad pumped world. A little more confusing that necessary isn't it.
I would stay away from the F1. I have heard way to many reports of them going bad, the 750GB model in particular.
If you do decide to go with a dual, drop down to an E8400. Very much like the Q6700 vs Q6600 your not gaining much besides a lighter wallet.
I think you have you ram speeds and FSB a little mixed up. The 1066 of the chip refers to intel's "quad pumped" numbers which ends up being 266Mhz FSB speed. The "1066" of the RAM refers to the "double data rate" of 533Mhz FSB speed, which the quad will not hit. Your chip will likely hit a wall around 475Mhz actual FSB, or 950Mhz in DDR2 terms, or 1900Mhz in Intel's quad pumped world. A little more confusing that necessary isn't it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Location
- Rockingham, NC
I would go with P45. You can get a P5Q or an Gigabyte EP45 for the same money.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2006
I would go with the first build .. With an E8400 instead .. Don't worry about water cooling, this is England .. Our ambient's are fine for air .. lol
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2006
Fair enough .. If you want a challenge (or at least a bit more of one then most Intel CPU's will offer) then go for one of the 45nm Quad's .. Q9xxx .. They require a little more tweaking then most to get stable at high clocks .. I know water looks fun, it's why I'm going it .. Plan to get my gear for my b-day as well (3rd July )
)
