The build list is obtained...

swimtech · Apr 23, 2008, 09:06 PM

Took some time, but I'm finally there, with help from DH and AMD!

Mainboard - Gigabyte EX38-DS4
Processor - Intel Q6600, I changed my mind...
CPU Cooler - Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro
GPU - ATI Radeon 3870 (!!!)
PSU - PC Power and Cooling S610EPS
Memory - GSkill 2Gig kit, HZ DDR2 800
Hard Drive - WD Caviar SE16 WD6400AAKS
Optical Drive - Lite-On LH20A1L-06 w/Lightscribe
Speakerset - Logitech X-540
Mouse+Keyboard - Microsoft Wireless Optical Desktop 4000
Case - Atrix CSCI-A9003-C4
Monitor - Sceptre X20WC Gamer (Glossy MVA panel)
...and a Tabula Rasa Fragmat mousing surface (I won it at a LAN party I helped with this past weekend - check out the back page of the latest CPU Magazine)

The last of the items will be here Friday, and I'll be building it out over the next week or two.

Ran a rough check with the latest free Sandra suite, this new machine should be about 4 times faster (or more...) than this present machine

!

I'll have a few things to try out in the coming weeks - won't I?

[hobo]eclipse · Apr 23, 2008, 09:17 PM

well dont that look fun! time to catch up on some gaming?

**kris23** · Apr 23, 2008, 09:27 PM

aint the Q6600 dropping in price at the end of this month?

**ChaosMinionX** · Apr 24, 2008, 12:35 AM

You can get Q6600's from Frys for 199.99 atm

PangingJr · Apr 24, 2008, 01:30 AM

if you like to overclock and if you already have Q6600 G0, then you may not want to consider using Q9450,
but if you want to buy a new Intel Core 2 Quad, both Q6700 and Q6600 are a bit more interesting than Intel 45-nm Q9300/Q9450
because of right now they (Q6700 and Q6600) do have great low price.
the Q6700's price is expected to be quite low, significantly lower than it used to be and it's not that much more then Q6600 and it might be a good seller. Q6700 is a bit more interesting than Q6600 and Q9450 at least for me.

mkk · Apr 24, 2008, 06:06 AM

More RAM.

swimtech · Apr 24, 2008, 08:25 AM

Yeah, I did a bit of searching and contemplating the past couple days before 'calling the ball' on the Q6600 - it was all about value and longevity.

The Q9xxx series is just plain overpriced right now - and unfortunately will likely stay that way for a few months. I really wanted to make a large jump to the 9450, but at $350 it was just too much for me to stomach when the retailers have already discounted the Q6600 (that one especially) and Q6700 CPUs rather nicely. The 9300 was a contender, but for $290.00 (and the low multiplier...) just didn't sit well with me value-wise. Granted, the new transistors, cooler overall operation, and instruction set (SSE4) were factors (for choosing the 8400 dual core too) - strong ones - but the 9300 is not looking to be as flexible as an overclocker's performance chip.

I had set myself on the 8400 dual core until last week. It is a great value, but I succumbed to the lure (wisdom...) of four cores for the same price and was willing to forego the excitement of clocking to 4Ghz. With the 6600 I know I'll likely be settling for 3.2Ghz 24/7 and possibly playing with 3.6Ghz plus (depending on the batch and VID - G0 stepping is about a given at this point) on occasions.

The 6700 hasn't dropped enough yet (that one is due to drop more soon) - still priced the same as the 9300 - and looks to overclock basically the same as the 6600 anyway. The 9 multiplier on the 6600 is very flexible - ideal actually for the frequencies I want to reach toward with the memory I have (DDR2 800Mhz, but should be very flexible on frequencies too), which I bought a year ago...

Anyway, there's the logic behind the processor choice.

You're right, I could probably use more memory - but I'll have to wait until tomorrow (figuratively)...

I've been reading a lot of y'all posts for the past several months - they have really helped to give me a good perspective - thank you - and please keep it up! I'll hopefully join in in a helpful way soon too!

Edit: Batch L750A936, S-Spec (stepping) SLACR (G0). Woot! I'll be looking for the VID and post...

**ChaosMinionX** · Apr 27, 2008, 07:18 PM

Did ya end up gettin that 6600 from Frys?

**kris23** · Apr 27, 2008, 07:18 PM

im not sure there is a frys in NC...

the price was raised too......
FRYS.com*|*Intel

swimtech · Apr 27, 2008, 09:14 PM

No, I didn't get the proc from Fry's, but I saw the ad - thought it was a tray unit - wanted the three year warranty.

I got the CPU from NewEgg for $225 after it had fallen $5 the night before - THEN it fell $5 again (crap!), but I did well on the other stuff...

Got it all together and working - right off the bat. Funny, even after 15 years (25 years repairing electronics for a living...) in computers I still get a little nervous before hitting the power button the first time! Even the LCD panel indicator for fan speed, temp, and time works perfectly! WOOT!

5.6 Performance Index (stock) - YESSS! All 5.9s except the memory (? - 'sup with that?)

Running Vista, Cat 8.4s, and typing now in this browser at 29C, CPU fan at 1100rpm. Room temp is right at 20C. And even though there are 5 total fans (2 Case, CPU, PSU, and GPU) running inside it is pretty quiet. I likey a lot!

BTW, where can I find the VID for the processor outside of CPU-Z?

**kris23** · Apr 27, 2008, 09:22 PM

isnt ur RAM the G.Skill DDR2 1066?

EDIT: woops i was thinking back when we were planning for you to get the 2x2GB G.Skill 1066 kit

the RAM speed makes sense....

Zelig · Apr 27, 2008, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimtech

5.6 Performance Index (stock) - YESSS! All 5.9s except the memory (? - 'sup with that?)

BTW, where can I find the VID for the processor outside of CPU-Z?

Not sure about the Vista score for memory, although it places caps based on the total memory, regardless of the speed. I get 5.9 for memory on my main S939 rig with DDR1 (4gb, 509 MHz, 3-3-2-8). I'm typing this from a G35 SFF PC I just put together, which only scores 4.8. (2gb, 800 MHz, 4-4-4-12).

Do you mean just other software? Everest is real nice for reporting a myriad of different settings, the ultimate version has a nice trial.

Necrosis · Apr 27, 2008, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimtech

Got it all together and working - right off the bat. Funny, even after 15 years (25 years repairing electronics for a living...) in computers I still get a little nervous before hitting the power button the first time!

Trust me I know what you mean. I always worry the PSU is going to fry or not as bad it's just going to be a a dud motherboard.

Do you notice a different from your old setup?

swimtech · Apr 27, 2008, 10:10 PM

That's a really good question - 'cause the answer is not an amazing amount just running Windows. A noticeable and nice difference, but not "WOW".

Granted, the Old Girl is running XP SP2 (neatly kept...) on an Athlon 1.2, 1.3G of PC100 ram, and a 9600XT - and its really always been ok even compared to my work desktop (a Core2 Duo 6420) and the MacBook Pro (2.0Ghz) I've been running XP Pro on the past two years.
This new machine boots faster, and windows for applets jump up faster, but I'm not blown away at all. Prefetching hasn't figured me out yet though either. I know you can turn down delays in the registry somehow, just never done it - so I don't know if that would have a large effect by itself...

Thanks Zelig - forgot about Everest, I'll get that with CPU-Z and RealTemp. But was really wondering what BIOS reading (VCore? - but I don't thinks that's it...) or Gigabyte utility reading (all I have installed so far) shows it.

**kris23** · Apr 27, 2008, 10:12 PM

you need more than 2GB RAM to feel what you said you wanted.... trust me, 4GB and up is ALOT faster than 2GB

**ChaosMinionX** · Apr 27, 2008, 10:14 PM

the low memory score is most likely due to lower FSB, combined with low RAM speed. If you had a higher FSB/RAM you would make 5.9 easy.

PangingJr · Apr 27, 2008, 11:06 PM

i think with your hardware's, the RAM will be at 5.9 and it should be easily obtained.
if you post the BIOS settings that you have i might be able to assist you a bit in the system memory setting.

swimtech · May 1, 2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PangingJr

i think with your hardware's, the RAM will be at 5.9 and it should be easily obtained.
if you post the BIOS settings that you have i might be able to assist you a bit in the system memory setting.

Thanks PangingJr., I can do that probably this weekend - I'd enjoy your pointers... I lowered the latencies and increased the voltage to do the index again, but it made no difference. Looks like I'll need to increase speed on the mem - and other settings to go with it - like ChaosMinionX implies...

I got Vista 64 on (clean install) last night, and the underlying chipset drivers, audio, lan, Catalyst 8.4 video driverset, and so on. I've had it on a total of about 10 hours so far, so the heat sink has settled in (runs Windows normally at 30C, browsing the net, etc - fan at 1200rpm) some.

Vista 64 is faster than Vista 32, even in 2G of ram. It was nicely snappy running through installs, control panel apps, and browsing. Not "wow", but now feels noticeably better than XP running on my older machine too.

This weekend, I want to install RealTemp, Sandra or Everest, and HDTach (if it will install/run on Vista64) to get an idea of some numbers as a foundation to go with how I'm feeling the machine run - I know you know what I mean guys...

OldBuzzard · May 1, 2008, 02:14 PM

I've run Vista 64 with 2, 4, and now 8GB of RAM, and it gets 'snappier' each time. It also seems like it's getting better as time goes by as SuperFetch optimizes.

Until you do add more RAM you can use a USB Memory Stick in RamBoost. That will also give a nice boost in performance.

With 2 and 4GB I was using a 4gb 'El Cheapo" generic one that I got from Microcenter, and it worked very well.

I'm considering using that for the PageFile as opposed to putting it on an HDD, altho, with 8GB I'm wondering if a PageFile is really necessary.

PangingJr · May 1, 2008, 04:15 PM

sounds like you are so very careful with the computer on both hardware and software, swimtech.
personally i don't restart much when installing software and drivers since XP.

[hobo]eclipse · May 1, 2008, 04:41 PM

noticed a F4a beta bios on the gigabyte site a cpla weeks ago, didnt try it, the update said it pertained to the new 45nm quads. didnt see it on the site a few days ago when looked.

anyone have any links or knowledge about the x38 chipset and the FSB overclocking? i messed a bit and didnt have much luck even posting at 425 with various MCH and FSB voltages and underclocking the RAM. Didnt do any exstensive testing though as 3.64Ghz at 405 FSB, 1080 RAM @5.5.3.13 is quite a boost from the A64x2 i had previous.

Good to see your up and running swimtech! What do you use for temp checking? Seems everest does the trick to get the "outer" cpu temp but the temp of the cores all seem to read 10c hotter in everything except real temp.

PangingJr · May 2, 2008, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by [hobo]eclipse

noticed a F4a beta bios on the gigabyte site a cpla weeks ago, didnt try it, the update said it pertained to the new 45nm quads. didnt see it on the site a few days ago when looked.

anyone have any links or knowledge about the x38 chipset and the FSB overclocking? i messed a bit and didnt have much luck even posting at 425 with various MCH and FSB voltages and underclocking the RAM. Didnt do any exstensive testing though as 3.64Ghz at 405 FSB, 1080 RAM @5.5.3.13 is quite a boost from the A64x2 i had previous.

Good to see your up and running swimtech! What do you use for temp checking? Seems everest does the trick to get the "outer" cpu temp but the temp of the cores all seem to read 10c hotter in everything except real temp.

i've seen your board get a very high FSB out of the box, i recall it was able to go above 500 FSB. i don't know what version of BIOS that came with the board, but it's been a while now so it could be older than yours.
the owner went to school in oversea lol, anyway, the CPU was an E8200 Q740A***T, i used to play with that CPU once before. the particular CPU starts needing a quite high Vcore at around 425 FSB already, likes, 425-450 FSB 1.30-1.40V, 500 FSB 1.48-1.575V, 530+ FSB 1.60-1.70V.

i suggest you try using a different BIOS anyway. and for a good start, try with a basic system memory setting, 5-5-5-15-Auto... and try 1:1.
otherwise, i think, either the particular CPU requires a more higher Vcore to get a high FSB overclock, or it won't overclock to higher FSB anymore.

PangingJr · May 2, 2008, 06:58 AM

i don't want you to damage your hardwares, this (below) is just for the idea of the Vcore setting out there.
i've seen the FSB can go even higher on different CPUs but the webpages will be in foreign languages.

it depends a whole lot on the CPU itself, but i think most of them have one thing in common, when you want to get a high FSB overclock, they'll use too much volts, lol. so if possible try to keep the vcore at below 1.3625V for your air-cooled overclocked.

Club‚ ‚é‚¾‚ñ@BLOG

here's translate version...