QX6700 question...

[ntgeek]

I saw in another thread that somebody mentioned there is a known limitation with QX6700 chips and 680i system boards that basically causes the max FSB to be 300mhz.

Can anybody confirm this or is it merely hit and miss??

ntgeek

 

[splat]

I think it's more a limitation of your cooling that anything else.

 

[ntgeek]

I may very well be heat however it seems strange to me that people with different cases and setups would have the same issue.

ntgeek

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

i don't know if 300 is the magic number, but there is problems running a quad at high fsb, on pretty much any board. the only one that i've seen ppl get respectable FSB on is the p5b-dlx.

 

[dominick32]

Thinking about it.
I tried to run 400 X 8 yesterday, after 10 X 320 was succesful on my P5B and it wont let me boot up the rig. Even my P5B Deluxe is having problems getting higher than 350 FSB on a quad core.

This is the same board that I had my E6700 in for a few days at 503 FSB so it is definitely a CPU limitation...

 

[ntgeek]

So, if the QX6700 has a FSB limitation is that enough to keep you from recommending it? IE would I be better with a different Processor?

ntgeek

 

[splat]

depends on what your needs are. in my opinion, the quad core systems out right now are purely "look what I can buy". Unless you have real specific needs, a dual core setup will be more than enough.

 

[William Hung]

FSB

With four cores trying to share the FSB, timings are tighter and you likely won't see a large FSB increase. My question is why would you want to though? There's an unlocked multiplier on the QX, just bump it if you need the speed.

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

depends on what your needs are. in my opinion, the quad core systems out right now are purely "look what I can buy". Unless you have real specific needs, a dual core setup will be more than enough.

 

[ntgeek]

depends on what your needs are. in my opinion, the quad core systems out right now are purely "look what I can buy". Unless you have real specific needs, a dual core setup will be more than enough.

In all honesty, this isn't about "look what I can buy" as money is tight for me. This is about not having to have this conversation again for a couple of years. At least for me anyway. My current system lasted me over 3 years.

I used to be a systems jocky who upgraded every chance I got (ie whenever I had the money). However, now I have two kids so money spent on computers is few and far between. I want to make this upgrade count for some time to come.

ntgeek

 

[dominick32]

depends on what your needs are. in my opinion, the quad core systems out right now are purely "look what I can buy". Unless you have real specific needs, a dual core setup will be more than enough.

In all honesty. I do take offense to that statement as well. I didnt buy a QX6700 to show everyone "look at what I can buy". If I wanted to do that, I wouldve bought a Rolex.

 

[dominick32]

With four cores trying to share the FSB, timings are tighter and you likely won't see a large FSB increase. My question is why would you want to though? There's an unlocked multiplier on the QX, just bump it if you need the speed.

Why would you want a high FSB?
Because some of us dont want to use a divider on the memory. Not to mention dividers are very finicky on the P5B. If my memory is good for 1000 mhz, I personally like to run my system at 500FSB, 1:1, which will net you the best performance hands down. You cant do that with a 12X multi and a divider.

Dom

 

[Gautam]

i975's usually top out at 360-400MHz FSB with Kentsfield, i965 400-450, and 680i usually not much higher than 320.

500 1:1 won't always net you the best performance, there's little doubt that 400 2:3 would be much faster, if your RAM can muster it of course.

 

[dominick32]

i975's usually top out at 360-400MHz FSB with Kentsfield, i965 400-450, and 680i usually not much higher than 320.

500 1:1 won't always net you the best performance, there's little doubt that 400 2:3 would be much faster, if your RAM can muster it of course.

G,
Every benchie I have ever run on any C2D processor has always produced better results 1:1 with high FSB. Always. I am finding it hard to understand the logic in your response.

Dom

 

[Gautam]

You haven't tried running your memory at 600 4-4-4 yet then.

 

[dominick32]

You haven't tried running your memory at 600 4-4-4 yet then.

LMFAO.....
600 4-4-4 cherry sticks with a hipro vdimm booster. So, no I havent. LOL

 

[Gautam]

The basic point is that updividers are often a lot faster than people give them credit for. Even if you're stuck at only 360MHz, running 2:3 (540MHz mem) would compete quite well with 540 1:1. Actually, if the 540 is using the 1333 strap, the lower FSB would actually win.

It's an issue that one needs to adapt to when stuck with low FSB on a quad, but it certainly doesn't mean you can't get performance.

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

so Dom, what practical purpose would you say you have for that CPU? i know you got it for benching and such, but if you didn't, are there any tasks that you do that can justify the price increase over say a well clocked e6600?

 

[dominick32]

so Dom, what practical purpose would you say you have for that CPU? i know you got it for benching and such, but if you didn't, are there any tasks that you do that can justify the price increase over say a well clocked e6600?

Look at my signature.
Not only the fact that you know me and my history on here and you know that I am simply an impulse buyer. But I do it for testing the latest and greatest. I am a different breed. If I had to do it for a business productivity computer it would be an E6300 C2D. With that being said, for the average user: No way! I absolutely cannot justify a QX6700 purchase. But for guys like me and Krag, yes. We are a different breed.

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

Look at my signature.
Not only the fact that you know me and my history on here and you know that I am simply an impulse buyer. But I do it for testing the latest and greatest. I am a different breed. If I had to do it for a business productivity computer it would be an E6300 C2D. With that being said, for the average user: No way! I absolutely cannot justify a QX6700 purchase. But for guys like me and Krag, yes. We are a different breed.

well, i think splat was talking about the average joe who just has to drop $4k on a dell box with a quad and 8800gtx sli. that's kinda what i was getting at.