I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

drool.....

Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...t_overclocker/

I can see my xmas stocking now....

regards

Thing

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

thingy wrote:

> drool.....
>
> Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
>
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...t_overclocker/
>
> I can see my xmas stocking now....
>
> regards
>
> Thing

My current CPU (Intel QX6700) doesn't have a locked multiplier, but I have
been unsuccessful in overclocking it with heat becoming an issue. I'm not
keen enough to do anything more than air cooling.
--
A.

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

Allistar wrote:
> thingy wrote:
>
>> drool.....
>>
>> Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
>>
>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...t_overclocker/
>>
>> I can see my xmas stocking now....
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Thing
>
> My current CPU (Intel QX6700) doesn't have a locked multiplier, but I have
> been unsuccessful in overclocking it with heat becoming an issue. I'm not
> keen enough to do anything more than air cooling.

To an extent me neither, but there are some interesting water cooling
kits that dont look too complicated.

here is a good article...

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...water_coolers/

It would also depend on how much I spent on the CPU, ie if I had got a
very expensive high end CPU then I would be reluctant to overclock it,
especially if it was only a small gain. If I had a cheap one
though....no great loss if I cook it....

This new "black" 5000 looks fairly cheap and such a candidate, IMHO.

regards

thing

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:48:44 +1300, thingy <thingy@not.here.commy>
wrote:

>drool.....
>
>Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
>
>http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...t_overclocker/
>
>I can see my xmas stocking now....
>
>regards
>
>Thing

Looks impressive. I was taking aim at the standard verson of the same
CPU, in a future new system but this one makes more sense.

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

Nighthawk wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:48:44 +1300, thingy <thingy@not.here.commy>
> wrote:
>
>> drool.....
>>
>> Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
>>
>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...t_overclocker/
>>
>> I can see my xmas stocking now....
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Thing
>
> Looks impressive. I was taking aim at the standard verson of the same
> CPU, in a future new system but this one makes more sense.
>
>

hmm, yes........for the "few" extra dollars it well looks worth it...I
was going to upgrade my machine (2x4000EE) to a 2x6000 soon but this
seems to make it pointless, the Black 2x5000 is a better deal....Even if
I am conservative on the overclocking and only match the 6000 I am going
to save purchase cost and energy....probably noise as well...

Otherwise I am going to get close to the 2x6400 for what looks like 1/2
the cost, less energy waste and less noise....I would think the sales of
the 2x6400 are going to bomb....mind you I dont think they are selling
anyway, anyone who wants to pay that much I'd expect to go Intel Quad
core....

I would think this will gut any CPU sale for AMD above 5000EE
actually....just get a 5000blk and multiply it to any speed you want...

regards

Thing

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

"thingy" <thingy@not.here.commy> wrote in message
news:vfu1v4-8iv.ln1@news.vuw.ac.nz...
> Nighthawk wrote:
>>
>> Looks impressive. I was taking aim at the standard verson of the same
>> CPU, in a future new system but this one makes more sense.
>>
>>
>
> hmm, yes........for the "few" extra dollars it well looks worth it...I was
> going to upgrade my machine (2x4000EE) to a 2x6000 soon but this seems to
> make it pointless, the Black 2x5000 is a better deal....Even if I am
> conservative on the overclocking and only match the 6000 I am going to
> save purchase cost and energy....probably noise as well...
>
> Otherwise I am going to get close to the 2x6400 for what looks like 1/2
> the cost, less energy waste and less noise....I would think the sales of
> the 2x6400 are going to bomb....mind you I dont think they are selling
> anyway, anyone who wants to pay that much I'd expect to go Intel Quad
> core....
>
> I would think this will gut any CPU sale for AMD above 5000EE
> actually....just get a 5000blk and multiply it to any speed you want...
>

You might also want to have at look at an earlier review of the X2-5600,
which for US$10 more than the X2 5000+ Black comes with a cooler (oddly, AMD
retails the X2 5000+ Black without one), twice the L2 cache, and a faster
memory clock. Stock performance is equivalent to (and on some benchmarks
better than) the X2-6000.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/...ainstream_cpu/

No oc potential with the X2-5600, and power consumption is higher. But
beware the TH benchmarks on over-clocked components, because unless you plan
to replicate the entire component kit they use you're likely to be
disappointed in your results. Most reviews I've seen put the stable oc
ceiling for the X2 5000+ Black at 3Ghz, which is good -- but a cut below the
TH numbers at 3.1 and 3.3. Just something to consider.

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

impossible wrote:
> "thingy" <thingy@not.here.commy> wrote in message
> news:vfu1v4-8iv.ln1@news.vuw.ac.nz...
>> Nighthawk wrote:
>>> Looks impressive. I was taking aim at the standard verson of the same
>>> CPU, in a future new system but this one makes more sense.
>>>
>>>
>> hmm, yes........for the "few" extra dollars it well looks worth it...I was
>> going to upgrade my machine (2x4000EE) to a 2x6000 soon but this seems to
>> make it pointless, the Black 2x5000 is a better deal....Even if I am
>> conservative on the overclocking and only match the 6000 I am going to
>> save purchase cost and energy....probably noise as well...
>>
>> Otherwise I am going to get close to the 2x6400 for what looks like 1/2
>> the cost, less energy waste and less noise....I would think the sales of
>> the 2x6400 are going to bomb....mind you I dont think they are selling
>> anyway, anyone who wants to pay that much I'd expect to go Intel Quad
>> core....
>>
>> I would think this will gut any CPU sale for AMD above 5000EE
>> actually....just get a 5000blk and multiply it to any speed you want...
>>
>
> You might also want to have at look at an earlier review of the X2-5600,
> which for US$10 more than the X2 5000+ Black comes with a cooler (oddly, AMD
> retails the X2 5000+ Black without one), twice the L2 cache, and a faster
> memory clock. Stock performance is equivalent to (and on some benchmarks
> better than) the X2-6000.

My understanding was the 5000blk came with a cooler....adding $70~$100
for a cooler makes the price comparison totally different....If it does
not then its price advantage is pretty much negated. I do have a spare
cooler, but hmm....one of the reasons I dismissed the 6400blk as an
upgrade was its price plus cooler made no sense. I would rather look at
an Intel Quad core, it is a better CPU and if the price is just about
the same...

>
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/...ainstream_cpu/

yes, I read this piece....

> No oc potential with the X2-5600, and power consumption is higher. But
> beware the TH benchmarks on over-clocked components, because unless you plan
> to replicate the entire component kit they use you're likely to be
> disappointed in your results. Most reviews I've seen put the stable oc
> ceiling for the X2 5000+ Black at 3Ghz, which is good -- but a cut below the
> TH numbers at 3.1 and 3.3. Just something to consider.

The only game/applications I have an issue with at present is Supreme
Commander, anything else just runs fine....So for my next upgrade my
choice of CPU is going to hinge almost totally on which CPU plays this
the best/acceptably.......

SC has just been/will be getting an expansion pack, from what I can read
its multicore capability pretty much points at an Intel Quad core with
NVidia....

regards

Thing

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

"thingy" <thingy@not.here.commy> wrote in message
news:8b72v4-rji.ln1@news.vuw.ac.nz...
> impossible wrote:
>> "thingy" <thingy@not.here.commy> wrote in message
>> news:vfu1v4-8iv.ln1@news.vuw.ac.nz...
>>> Nighthawk wrote:
>>>> Looks impressive. I was taking aim at the standard verson of the same
>>>> CPU, in a future new system but this one makes more sense.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> hmm, yes........for the "few" extra dollars it well looks worth it...I
>>> was going to upgrade my machine (2x4000EE) to a 2x6000 soon but this
>>> seems to make it pointless, the Black 2x5000 is a better deal....Even if
>>> I am conservative on the overclocking and only match the 6000 I am going
>>> to save purchase cost and energy....probably noise as well...
>>>
>>> Otherwise I am going to get close to the 2x6400 for what looks like 1/2
>>> the cost, less energy waste and less noise....I would think the sales of
>>> the 2x6400 are going to bomb....mind you I dont think they are selling
>>> anyway, anyone who wants to pay that much I'd expect to go Intel Quad
>>> core....
>>>
>>> I would think this will gut any CPU sale for AMD above 5000EE
>>> actually....just get a 5000blk and multiply it to any speed you want...
>>>
>>
>> You might also want to have at look at an earlier review of the X2-5600,
>> which for US$10 more than the X2 5000+ Black comes with a cooler (oddly,
>> AMD retails the X2 5000+ Black without one), twice the L2 cache, and a
>> faster memory clock. Stock performance is equivalent to (and on some
>> benchmarks better than) the X2-6000.
>
> My understanding was the 5000blk came with a cooler....adding $70~$100 for
> a cooler makes the price comparison totally different....If it does not
> then its price advantage is pretty much negated. I do have a spare cooler,
> but hmm....one of the reasons I dismissed the 6400blk as an upgrade was
> its price plus cooler made no sense. I would rather look at an Intel Quad
> core, it is a better CPU and if the price is just about the same...
>
>>
>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/...ainstream_cpu/
>
> yes, I read this piece....
>
>> No oc potential with the X2-5600, and power consumption is higher. But
>> beware the TH benchmarks on over-clocked components, because unless you
>> plan to replicate the entire component kit they use you're likely to be
>> disappointed in your results. Most reviews I've seen put the stable oc
>> ceiling for the X2 5000+ Black at 3Ghz, which is good -- but a cut below
>> the TH numbers at 3.1 and 3.3. Just something to consider.
>
> The only game/applications I have an issue with at present is Supreme
> Commander, anything else just runs fine....So for my next upgrade my
> choice of CPU is going to hinge almost totally on which CPU plays this the
> best/acceptably.......
>
> SC has just been/will be getting an expansion pack, from what I can read
> its multicore capability pretty much points at an Intel Quad core with
> NVidia....
>

Considering the price you pay, the Quad Core benchmarks have never really
impressed me. Between the QX6700, say, and the Core2 Duo E6850, there's an
almost 100% difference in price (US$260) but only a 5% difference in
performance (using the SC benchmark from Tom's). Whether this is a matter of
the Quad Core design being immature, or software design needing to catch up
with hardware design, I don't know -- but it seems like earlty adopters here
are paying a mighty steep premium for what amounts to bragging rights.

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

impossible wrote:
> "thingy" <thingy@not.here.commy> wrote in message
> news:8b72v4-rji.ln1@news.vuw.ac.nz...
>> impossible wrote:
>>> "thingy" <thingy@not.here.commy> wrote in message
>>> news:vfu1v4-8iv.ln1@news.vuw.ac.nz...
>>>> Nighthawk wrote:
>>>>> Looks impressive. I was taking aim at the standard verson of the same
>>>>> CPU, in a future new system but this one makes more sense.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> hmm, yes........for the "few" extra dollars it well looks worth it...I
>>>> was going to upgrade my machine (2x4000EE) to a 2x6000 soon but this
>>>> seems to make it pointless, the Black 2x5000 is a better deal....Even if
>>>> I am conservative on the overclocking and only match the 6000 I am going
>>>> to save purchase cost and energy....probably noise as well...
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise I am going to get close to the 2x6400 for what looks like 1/2
>>>> the cost, less energy waste and less noise....I would think the sales of
>>>> the 2x6400 are going to bomb....mind you I dont think they are selling
>>>> anyway, anyone who wants to pay that much I'd expect to go Intel Quad
>>>> core....
>>>>
>>>> I would think this will gut any CPU sale for AMD above 5000EE
>>>> actually....just get a 5000blk and multiply it to any speed you want...
>>>>
>>> You might also want to have at look at an earlier review of the X2-5600,
>>> which for US$10 more than the X2 5000+ Black comes with a cooler (oddly,
>>> AMD retails the X2 5000+ Black without one), twice the L2 cache, and a
>>> faster memory clock. Stock performance is equivalent to (and on some
>>> benchmarks better than) the X2-6000.
>> My understanding was the 5000blk came with a cooler....adding $70~$100 for
>> a cooler makes the price comparison totally different....If it does not
>> then its price advantage is pretty much negated. I do have a spare cooler,
>> but hmm....one of the reasons I dismissed the 6400blk as an upgrade was
>> its price plus cooler made no sense. I would rather look at an Intel Quad
>> core, it is a better CPU and if the price is just about the same...
>>
>>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/...ainstream_cpu/
>> yes, I read this piece....
>>
>>> No oc potential with the X2-5600, and power consumption is higher. But
>>> beware the TH benchmarks on over-clocked components, because unless you
>>> plan to replicate the entire component kit they use you're likely to be
>>> disappointed in your results. Most reviews I've seen put the stable oc
>>> ceiling for the X2 5000+ Black at 3Ghz, which is good -- but a cut below
>>> the TH numbers at 3.1 and 3.3. Just something to consider.
>> The only game/applications I have an issue with at present is Supreme
>> Commander, anything else just runs fine....So for my next upgrade my
>> choice of CPU is going to hinge almost totally on which CPU plays this the
>> best/acceptably.......
>>
>> SC has just been/will be getting an expansion pack, from what I can read
>> its multicore capability pretty much points at an Intel Quad core with
>> NVidia....
>>
>
> Considering the price you pay, the Quad Core benchmarks have never really
> impressed me. Between the QX6700, say, and the Core2 Duo E6850, there's an
> almost 100% difference in price (US$260) but only a 5% difference in
> performance (using the SC benchmark from Tom's). Whether this is a matter of
> the Quad Core design being immature, or software design needing to catch up
> with hardware design, I don't know -- but it seems like earlty adopters here
> are paying a mighty steep premium for what amounts to bragging rights.
>
>

Interesting that there is such a price difference, for Dell servers
whether a dual or quad core'd XEON CPU machine its the same price...Dell
cannot seem to figure out why we would want dual cores only
anymore....they seem "shocked" that some vendors charge per core and not
per socket...

I have not looked at the Intel CPUs much as yet....the main thing would
seem to be to get a motherboard with upgrade potential in it with a
"just good enough CPU" as long as the hit for that is not very big.

regards

thing

Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....
 

Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
> impossible wrote:
> > "thingy" <thingy@not.here.commy> wrote in message
> > news:vfu1v4-8iv.ln1@news.vuw.ac.nz...
> > You might also want to have at look at an earlier review of the
> > X2-5600, which for US$10 more than the X2 5000+ Black comes with a
> > cooler (oddly, AMD retails the X2 5000+ Black without one), twice
> > the L2 cache, and a faster memory clock. Stock performance is
> > equivalent to (and on some benchmarks better than) the X2-6000.
>
> My understanding was the 5000blk came with a cooler....adding $70~$100
> for a cooler makes the price comparison totally different....If it
> does not then its price advantage is pretty much negated. I do have a
> spare cooler, but hmm....one of the reasons I dismissed the 6400blk
> as an upgrade was its price plus cooler made no sense. I would rather
> look at an Intel Quad core, it is a better CPU and if the price is
> just about the same...

According to the folks in the OC groups, (where they've been talking about
them for a while) it doesn't come with a cooler as it's taken as read that
anyone getting one is either upgrading and will have a cooler or wanting to
OC the shite out of it and will use an after-market cooler anyway.

The consensus is that it only makes sense to buy one as un upgrade,
otherwise Intel all the way.

I could be wrong, I've been wrong before....
--
TTFN

Shaun.