Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > budget CPU takes crown

Reply
Thread Tools

budget CPU takes crown

 
 
Nova
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2006
Mercury wrote:
> How did they propose to get rid of all that extra heat? It is talked about -
> about - but no viable solution was made. Until you work out how to get that
> extra heat away, you have a bundle of problems. You are likley to need a
> quality water cooling system and this will add around $400 to your costs.
>
> For the amount of heat produced, somehow I don't think any of the quality
> air cooled solutions would work adequately. But then you could try a few to
> see if any work well enough - they're only $80 or more each to tinker with.
>
>


Obviously they managed to do it , as they said overclocking at lower
speeds wasnt a problem, then they had to change fans to a zalman, at the
highest 4.0ghz+ speeds they were using watercooling. Did you read the
article?

As for getting rid of heat out of the case there are _loads_ of articles
on tomshardware or any overclocking site that go into this in detail.

If tomshardware say they can run it reliably at those speeds it means
they have tested it

>
>
>
> "Nova" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:44627fb6$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> A cpu that can be bought for about $NZD 250 in NZ takes the crown beating
>> the best CPU's from AMD and Intel that cost over 1,000 USD.
>>
>> If I was about to buy a cpu I certainly would be buying that
>>
>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/...res/index.html

>
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mercury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2006

"Nova" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:4463a09f$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Mercury wrote:
>> How did they propose to get rid of all that extra heat? It is talked
>> about - about - but no viable solution was made. Until you work out how
>> to get that extra heat away, you have a bundle of problems. You are
>> likley to need a quality water cooling system and this will add around
>> $400 to your costs.
>>
>> For the amount of heat produced, somehow I don't think any of the quality
>> air cooled solutions would work adequately. But then you could try a few
>> to see if any work well enough - they're only $80 or more each to tinker
>> with.
>>
>>

>
> Obviously they managed to do it , as they said overclocking at lower
> speeds wasnt a problem, then they had to change fans to a zalman, at the
> highest 4.0ghz+ speeds they were using watercooling. Did you read the
> article?


Yes... there was no depth on this front. My point is that when one considers
this more fully and includes water cooling in the equation then it changes
the basis of the article since a water cooling unit will cost more than the
CPU!


> As for getting rid of heat out of the case there are _loads_ of articles
> on tomshardware or any overclocking site that go into this in detail.
>
> If tomshardware say they can run it reliably at those speeds it means they
> have tested it


Of course! A few shots of their liquid helium stuff would have been nice
though.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Waylon Kenning
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-12-2006
T'was the Thu, 11 May 2006 23:31:54 +1200 when I remembered -=rjh=-
<(E-Mail Removed)> saying something like this:

>Seriously, though, this kind of power consumption for a PC is just
>insane. Even normally clocked PCs are over the top in this respect.


I guess that's one of the advantages of say going towards something a
little easier in the power regards yet still having performance, i.e.
Intel Core Duo type processor.
--
Cheers,

Waylon Kenning.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Nova
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-12-2006
Mercury wrote:
> "Nova" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:4463a09f$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Mercury wrote:
>>> How did they propose to get rid of all that extra heat? It is talked
>>> about - about - but no viable solution was made. Until you work out how
>>> to get that extra heat away, you have a bundle of problems. You are
>>> likley to need a quality water cooling system and this will add around
>>> $400 to your costs.
>>>
>>> For the amount of heat produced, somehow I don't think any of the quality
>>> air cooled solutions would work adequately. But then you could try a few
>>> to see if any work well enough - they're only $80 or more each to tinker
>>> with.
>>>
>>>

>> Obviously they managed to do it , as they said overclocking at lower
>> speeds wasnt a problem, then they had to change fans to a zalman, at the
>> highest 4.0ghz+ speeds they were using watercooling. Did you read the
>> article?

>
> Yes... there was no depth on this front. My point is that when one considers
> this more fully and includes water cooling in the equation then it changes
> the basis of the article since a water cooling unit will cost more than the
> CPU!
>
>
>> As for getting rid of heat out of the case there are _loads_ of articles
>> on tomshardware or any overclocking site that go into this in detail.
>>
>> If tomshardware say they can run it reliably at those speeds it means they
>> have tested it

>
> Of course! A few shots of their liquid helium stuff would have been nice
> though.
>
>
>

Well they only needed the water cooling when it was running at 4ghz.
A water cooler + the cpu is still cheaper than over the one grand USD
you'd pay to get the equivalent high end cpu. so for extreme gamers who
would fork out that kind of $$ its still a good deal for them cause it
not only beats the performance of the high end cpu's its cheaper.

They still had it running at like 3.5 ghz on an air cooler which
so a dual core 3.5ghz processor for nz 250 is still pretty good I think.

Of course the power usage is insane, but for most gamers, they don't
look at power usage
 
Reply With Quote
 
~misfit~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-12-2006
Craig Sutton wrote:
> "~misfit~" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Nova wrote:
>>> A cpu that can be bought for about $NZD 250 in NZ takes the crown
>>> beating the best CPU's from AMD and Intel that cost over 1,000 USD.
>>>
>>> If I was about to buy a cpu I certainly would be buying that
>>>
>>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/...res/index.html

>>
>> Wow!! Makes me wish I was building a new PC about now. That's enough
>> of an incentive to make me change my AMD-only rule that started when
>> the P4s first came out and Intel chopped the Tualatin.
>>
>> Alas! My very O/C'able XP2500+ will have to last me for a while yet.
>> --

> What speed are you getting with the Xp2500. Hmm my Mum has one in her
> shuttle. "Here is your mothers day present, I upgraded your pc "....


I currently have it on 200MHz FSB, a 10.5 multiplier and 1.50V vcore. BIOS
tells me it's an XP3000+.

However, at default vcore (1.65V) it'll run 200 x 11 (XP3200+) easilly. Now
it's winter I think I'll speed it up a bit, I was encoding XviDs last night
and the die temp was only 42C at 100% CPU load. Idles at 30.

To play as much as I do you need an unlocked one. However, some unlocked
ones will "become" XP3200+'s just by changing the FSB to 200MHz (if your RAM
is PC3200 or better) and maybe increasing vcore slightly (keeping an eye on
temps, MBM5 is ideal for this).

A lot also depends on your mobo. If it has 'locked' PCI and AGP speeds (and
your CPU is locked) then maybe a 180MHz FSB (or so) would be a good
improvement if it won't do 200 stably (or the RAM isn't rated or capable of
200). A lot of XP2500+s were 'downgraded' XP3200+s as there was far more
demand for the cheaper component.

Have fun. As always, test stability (and maximum likely operating temp) with
Prime95 in torture-test mode.
--
Shaun. (About to re-boot his PC and speed up the CPU)


 
Reply With Quote
 
~misfit~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-12-2006
Mercury wrote:
> "Nova" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:4463a09f$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Mercury wrote:
>>> How did they propose to get rid of all that extra heat? It is talked
>>> about - about - but no viable solution was made. Until you work out
>>> how to get that extra heat away, you have a bundle of problems. You
>>> are likley to need a quality water cooling system and this will add
>>> around $400 to your costs.
>>>
>>> For the amount of heat produced, somehow I don't think any of the
>>> quality air cooled solutions would work adequately. But then you
>>> could try a few to see if any work well enough - they're only $80
>>> or more each to tinker with.
>>>
>>>

>>
>> Obviously they managed to do it , as they said overclocking at lower
>> speeds wasnt a problem, then they had to change fans to a zalman, at
>> the highest 4.0ghz+ speeds they were using watercooling. Did you
>> read the article?

>
> Yes... there was no depth on this front. My point is that when one
> considers this more fully and includes water cooling in the equation
> then it changes the basis of the article since a water cooling unit
> will cost more than the CPU!


I don't think so. Brands like Thermaltake do off-the-shelf units that are
far less expensive than the difference between that CPU and an Intel Extreme
Edition. Quite a few O/C'ers will have water-cooling gear already as well.
--
Shaun.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[ANN] crown 1.0.0 Joel VanderWerf Ruby 5 08-20-2009 05:13 PM
Panasonic challenges Olympus for P&S mediocrity crown Rich Digital Photography 44 07-31-2007 05:24 AM
Gates loses his crown to a Mexican GreenieLeBrun Computer Support 4 07-07-2007 12:32 AM
aspnet_wp process suddenly takes 99% of CPU... =?Utf-8?B?RmVuZw==?= ASP .Net 1 06-02-2005 08:20 PM
Queen or Crown Plato Computer Support 13 12-16-2004 08:17 AM



Advertisments