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

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by thingy, Oct 22, 2007.

  1. thingy

    thingy Guest

    thingy, Oct 22, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. thingy

    Allistar Guest

    thingy wrote:

    > drool.....
    >
    > Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
    >
    > http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/22/budget_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.
     
    Allistar, Oct 23, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. thingy

    thingy Guest

    Allistar wrote:
    > thingy wrote:
    >
    >> drool.....
    >>
    >> Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
    >>
    >> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/22/budget_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/2007/10/05/comparing_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
     
    thingy, Oct 23, 2007
    #3
  4. thingy

    Nighthawk Guest

    On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:48:44 +1300, thingy <>
    wrote:

    >drool.....
    >
    >Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
    >
    >http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/22/budget_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.
     
    Nighthawk, Oct 23, 2007
    #4
  5. thingy

    thingy Guest

    Nighthawk wrote:
    > On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:48:44 +1300, thingy <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> drool.....
    >>
    >> Guess AMD is desperate for sales.........
    >>
    >> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/22/budget_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
     
    thingy, Oct 23, 2007
    #5
  6. thingy

    impossible Guest

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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/2007/05/04/which_is_the_best_mainstream_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.
     
    impossible, Oct 23, 2007
    #6
  7. thingy

    thingy Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> 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/2007/05/04/which_is_the_best_mainstream_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
     
    thingy, Oct 23, 2007
    #7
  8. thingy

    impossible Guest

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> 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/2007/05/04/which_is_the_best_mainstream_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.
     
    impossible, Oct 24, 2007
    #8
  9. thingy

    thingy Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> 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/2007/05/04/which_is_the_best_mainstream_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
     
    thingy, Oct 24, 2007
    #9
  10. thingy

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    > impossible wrote:
    > > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > 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.
     
    ~misfit~, Oct 24, 2007
    #10
  11. thingy

    Jerry Guest

    ~misfit~ wrote:

    > I could be wrong, I've been wrong before....


    I thought I made a misteak once, but I wss worng
     
    Jerry, Oct 24, 2007
    #11
  12. thingy

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on the interweb "Jerry" typed:
    > ~misfit~ wrote:
    >
    > > I could be wrong, I've been wrong before....

    >
    > I thought I made a misteak once, but I wss worng


    Heh! Yeah, that's what I meant. :)
    --
    TTFN

    Shaun.
     
    ~misfit~, Oct 24, 2007
    #12
  13. thingy

    Nighthawk Guest

    On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:44:17 +1300, "~misfit~"
    <> wrote:

    >Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    >> impossible wrote:
    >> > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:...
    >> > 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....


    But some people wouldn't use the stock cooler anyway. I didn't when I
    built my XP2400+ system, going for a Zalman 7000alcu B1. If I built a
    new system I would do the same, go for an aftermarket cooler like one
    of the new heatpipe designs. For me the less noise the better.
     
    Nighthawk, Oct 24, 2007
    #13
  14. thingy

    impossible Guest

    "Nighthawk" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:44:17 +1300, "~misfit~"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>> > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >>> > news:...
    >>> > 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....

    >
    > But some people wouldn't use the stock cooler anyway. I didn't when I
    > built my XP2400+ system, going for a Zalman 7000alcu B1. If I built a
    > new system I would do the same, go for an aftermarket cooler like one
    > of the new heatpipe designs. For me the less noise the better.
    >


    Buyers have always had the option with AMD in the past to buy retail (with
    cooler) or oem (without). What's different with the X2 5000 Black is that
    the retail version has no cooler, so you **must** supply your own. That adds
    cost to the purchase, no matter what your cooler preference might be. And
    for many users that will be a deal-breaker, simply because the performance
    improvement they were looking for can be met now by taking those cooler
    addon dollars and putting them into a comparably priced upgrade to a better
    spec'd stock cpu.
     
    impossible, Oct 24, 2007
    #14
  15. thingy

    thingy Guest

    ~misfit~ wrote:
    > Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>> 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.


    yep, I think I have pretty much agree come round to agreeing totally
    (with the OC groups concensus)....

    Horses for courses, I was thinking to upgrade my pci-e based 4000x2 to a
    6000x2 but the 5000x2 looks a better bet for that particular machine as
    it does not need to run flat out often, ie except on the occasional
    game. When doing audio work the 5000x2 would have a huge advantage, low
    wattage hence way better suited to a passive cooler as silence is most
    important. In which case setting the multiplier up in the bios on boot
    for the gaming session is not great issue, I CAN have my cake and eat it!

    ;]

    When I can afford to, I am going to go Intel for the "serious" game
    machine as they seem to be way more overclockable and seem better suited
    to the likes of Supreme Commander....

    I really cant see the point of trying to overclock an AMD based
    machine, you buy it for its high bang for its buck not for how far it
    can be "stretched".....ie if I was serios on a CPU cooler it would have
    to be a watercooled one, so thats $300 odd and a well heat piped or even
    wet cooled chipset'd motherboard, so thats another $500+ in which case I
    would be looking for a major CPU to match that cost....for a no expense
    spared setup AMD would not feature....

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 24, 2007
    #15
  16. thingy

    thingy Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "Nighthawk" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:...
    >> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:44:17 +1300, "~misfit~"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    >>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>> 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....

    >> But some people wouldn't use the stock cooler anyway. I didn't when I
    >> built my XP2400+ system, going for a Zalman 7000alcu B1. If I built a
    >> new system I would do the same, go for an aftermarket cooler like one
    >> of the new heatpipe designs. For me the less noise the better.
    >>

    >
    > Buyers have always had the option with AMD in the past to buy retail (with
    > cooler) or oem (without). What's different with the X2 5000 Black is that
    > the retail version has no cooler, so you **must** supply your own. That adds
    > cost to the purchase, no matter what your cooler preference might be. And
    > for many users that will be a deal-breaker, simply because the performance
    > improvement they were looking for can be met now by taking those cooler
    > addon dollars and putting them into a comparably priced upgrade to a better
    > spec'd stock cpu.
    >
    >


    Exactly.....for overclocking/buying new it makes no sense....

    As an example the AMD 6400+ is $375, a good cooler is circa $90....so I
    have just spent $465.....

    $465....wow...this gets me a lot of Intel CPU, I can get a retail Intel
    Q6600 or a E6800 for $440 ish and those I would consider better CPUs....

    So for the 6400blk to make sense it needs to be around $350~370
    including the fan....so, today its $100 over priced....

    The 5000blk, when its available here has to be around (including fan)
    $300~320 to make sense for a new machine or at least cpu/m-board upgrade
    combo....

    You can take it as an upgrade and re-use the cooler but its not really a
    bang for buck upgrade, ie I think AMD is making more out of the deal
    than you are.....

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 24, 2007
    #16
  17. thingy

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    > ~misfit~ wrote:
    > > Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    > > > impossible wrote:
    > > > > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    > > > > news:...
    > > > > 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.

    >
    > yep, I think I have pretty much agree come round to agreeing totally
    > (with the OC groups concensus)....
    >
    > Horses for courses, I was thinking to upgrade my pci-e based 4000x2
    > to a 6000x2 but the 5000x2 looks a better bet for that particular
    > machine as it does not need to run flat out often, ie except on the
    > occasional game. When doing audio work the 5000x2 would have a huge
    > advantage, low wattage hence way better suited to a passive cooler as
    > silence is most important. In which case setting the multiplier up in
    > the bios on boot for the gaming session is not great issue, I CAN
    > have my cake and eat it!
    > ;]
    >
    > When I can afford to, I am going to go Intel for the "serious" game
    > machine as they seem to be way more overclockable and seem better
    > suited to the likes of Supreme Commander....


    Way more overclockable is right. I bought a $100 Asus Socket 775 mATX mobo
    with *zero* overclocking options (*and* it takes DDR RAM and AGP cards,
    great for me, upgrade on a budget). I bought an E4500 Core2Duo 800MHz FSB
    CPU that runs stock at 2.2GHz with 2MB L2 cache. I did a fairly simple (less
    than 10 minutes, $20 for conductive paint of which I used 1/100th and a tiny
    bit of sellotape) mod to two adjacent BSEL lands on the CPU and now the CPU
    bootstraps at 1066MHz FSB! 2.93GHz dual-core that has grunt to spare from a
    $200 CPU! No vcore increase (my mobo, a P5PE-VM, doesn't give the option
    anyway) and it runs Orthos all day without a mistake. $300 all-up for the
    upgrade as I'm using my old case, RAM AGP card etc.

    This system is now (roughly) 5 times as powerful as the Barton 3200+ it
    replaced and uses no more electricity. In fact a bit less, especially at
    idle. In fact a lot less. At 100% CPU usuage it's a /bit/ less but how often
    is this powerhouse going to be at 100% on both cores?

    I used to be a die-hard AMD guy. Now it's Intel all the way since they
    realised their mistake in dropping the Tualatin and went back to
    short-pipeline architecture. The great thing about the BSEL mod that I did
    is it's so risk-free. A cotton-bud with a bit of acetone will undo it in
    seconds. Not like the old "break off pin x..." pinmods.

    > I really cant see the point of trying to overclock an AMD based
    > machine, you buy it for its high bang for its buck not for how far it
    > can be "stretched".....ie if I was serios on a CPU cooler it would
    > have to be a watercooled one, so thats $300 odd and a well heat piped
    > or even wet cooled chipset'd motherboard, so thats another $500+ in
    > which case I would be looking for a major CPU to match that
    > cost....for a no expense spared setup AMD would not feature....


    My OCed E4500 is using the stock cooler and hits 57°C on both cores after
    being at 100% load for a few minutes. It doesn't go higher. Well within
    specs.

    Cheers,
    --
    Shaun.
     
    ~misfit~, Oct 25, 2007
    #17
  18. thingy

    Puddle Guest

    ~misfit~ wrote:
    > Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    >> ~misfit~ wrote:
    >>> Somewhere on the interweb "thingy" typed:
    >>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>> 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.

    >> yep, I think I have pretty much agree come round to agreeing totally
    >> (with the OC groups concensus)....
    >>
    >> Horses for courses, I was thinking to upgrade my pci-e based 4000x2
    >> to a 6000x2 but the 5000x2 looks a better bet for that particular
    >> machine as it does not need to run flat out often, ie except on the
    >> occasional game. When doing audio work the 5000x2 would have a huge
    >> advantage, low wattage hence way better suited to a passive cooler as
    >> silence is most important. In which case setting the multiplier up in
    >> the bios on boot for the gaming session is not great issue, I CAN
    >> have my cake and eat it!
    >> ;]
    >>
    >> When I can afford to, I am going to go Intel for the "serious" game
    >> machine as they seem to be way more overclockable and seem better
    >> suited to the likes of Supreme Commander....

    >
    > Way more overclockable is right. I bought a $100 Asus Socket 775 mATX mobo
    > with *zero* overclocking options (*and* it takes DDR RAM and AGP cards,
    > great for me, upgrade on a budget). I bought an E4500 Core2Duo 800MHz FSB
    > CPU that runs stock at 2.2GHz with 2MB L2 cache. I did a fairly simple (less
    > than 10 minutes, $20 for conductive paint of which I used 1/100th and a tiny
    > bit of sellotape) mod to two adjacent BSEL lands on the CPU and now the CPU
    > bootstraps at 1066MHz FSB! 2.93GHz dual-core that has grunt to spare from a
    > $200 CPU! No vcore increase (my mobo, a P5PE-VM, doesn't give the option
    > anyway) and it runs Orthos all day without a mistake. $300 all-up for the
    > upgrade as I'm using my old case, RAM AGP card etc.



    I am interested in what you have done. I unfortunately have to watch
    the spending on computer parts these days due to a list of other things
    that are apparently more important :(.

    I have a 6600 gt agp so am debating on whether to get a similar board to
    you and then i just have to fork out on the board and cpu... then the
    next time around new board and pci-e graphics card i guess.... then id
    have to get ddr2 memory too... damn there is always something heh, pc's
    are money pits...

    Though I am wondering how long I can put the upgrade off from my 2.8
    p4.. Do you think supreme commander will run on a 2.8p4 with a 6600 gt
    on low settings?

    Was the Overclocking easy to do? (i am not electronics genius) and don't
    like soldering that is for sure.. but a dual core 2.93 for 200 sounds
    really tempting.. what kind of cooling have you got?


    >
    > This system is now (roughly) 5 times as powerful as the Barton 3200+ it
    > replaced and uses no more electricity. In fact a bit less, especially at
    > idle. In fact a lot less. At 100% CPU usuage it's a /bit/ less but how often
    > is this powerhouse going to be at 100% on both cores?
    >
    > I used to be a die-hard AMD guy. Now it's Intel all the way since they
    > realised their mistake in dropping the Tualatin and went back to
    > short-pipeline architecture. The great thing about the BSEL mod that I did
    > is it's so risk-free. A cotton-bud with a bit of acetone will undo it in
    > seconds. Not like the old "break off pin x..." pinmods.
    >
    >> I really cant see the point of trying to overclock an AMD based
    >> machine, you buy it for its high bang for its buck not for how far it
    >> can be "stretched".....ie if I was serios on a CPU cooler it would
    >> have to be a watercooled one, so thats $300 odd and a well heat piped
    >> or even wet cooled chipset'd motherboard, so thats another $500+ in
    >> which case I would be looking for a major CPU to match that
    >> cost....for a no expense spared setup AMD would not feature....

    >
    > My OCed E4500 is using the stock cooler and hits 57°C on both cores after
    > being at 100% load for a few minutes. It doesn't go higher. Well within
    > specs.
    >
    > Cheers,
     
    Puddle, Oct 26, 2007
    #18
  19. thingy

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Cheap fast C2D. Was: Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multiplied CPU....

    Somewhere on the interweb "Puddle" typed:
    > ~misfit~ wrote:
    > > Way more overclockable is right. I bought a $100 Asus Socket 775
    > > mATX mobo with *zero* overclocking options (*and* it takes DDR RAM
    > > and AGP cards, great for me, upgrade on a budget). I bought an
    > > E4500 Core2Duo 800MHz FSB CPU that runs stock at 2.2GHz with 2MB L2
    > > cache. I did a fairly simple (less than 10 minutes, $20 for
    > > conductive paint of which I used 1/100th and a tiny bit of
    > > sellotape) mod to two adjacent BSEL lands on the CPU and now the
    > > CPU bootstraps at 1066MHz FSB! 2.93GHz dual-core that has grunt to
    > > spare from a $200 CPU! No vcore increase (my mobo, a P5PE-VM,
    > > doesn't give the option anyway) and it runs Orthos all day without
    > > a mistake. $300 all-up for the upgrade as I'm using my old case,
    > > RAM AGP card etc.

    >
    >
    > I am interested in what you have done. I unfortunately have to watch
    > the spending on computer parts these days due to a list of other
    > things that are apparently more important :(.


    I know the feeling. I had to renew my car insurance and passport in the last
    couple months and didn't think I'd be able to get a "new PC" any time soon.

    > I have a 6600 gt agp so am debating on whether to get a similar board
    > to you and then i just have to fork out on the board and cpu... then
    > the next time around new board and pci-e graphics card i guess....
    > then id have to get ddr2 memory too... damn there is always something
    > heh, pc's are money pits...


    Yeah. I figure, with the upgarde I've just done I'm good for a few more
    years, extending the life of my 2GB DDR RAM and my AGP card. By the time I
    need (or, more likely, want) anything faster it'll all be new gen stuff
    anyway. DDR3 and 45nm fab 4/8/16 core CPUs (Which, incidently, won't run in
    a lot of today's mobos) will be ubiquitous or even superceded.

    > Though I am wondering how long I can put the upgrade off from my 2.8
    > p4..


    If you want to use one of these "cross-over" motherboards that uses DDR and
    AGP then you don't have long. They're fast dissapearing. Hardware retailers
    like to sell you more stuff, not boards that let you get away with re-using
    your old kit. If I were looking to upgrade in the next year or 18 months on
    a budget I'd do it now. (LOL, actually I just did!)

    > Do you think supreme commander will run on a 2.8p4 with a 6600 gt
    > on low settings?


    I'm not familiar with the game. sorry.

    > Was the Overclocking easy to do?


    As long as you have reasonable eyesight and steady hands it's easy as pie.
    There are two 'lands' on the CPU bottom next to each other, BSEL1 and BSEL2,
    which output a signal to the mobo to tell it what FSB to boot up at. All you
    have to do is apply a sliver of tape over BSEL1 to insulate it, then smear a
    small blob of conductive paint with a needle (rear windscreen defogger
    repair paint) so that the socket gets the signal from BSEL2 on both BSEL
    pins. (There are other mods out there to do the same thing but none are as
    safe or relaible as this one.)

    Then; Voila! The CPU boots as a 1066FSB instead of a 800FSB. I've 'done' two
    CPUs now and both took about 10 minutes each (then 30 minutes for the paint
    to dry) and worked right first time. A 2.2GHz CPU beomes a 2.93GHz CPU. I
    just started SETI again for the hell of it and it's chewing through the
    units!

    > (i am not electronics genius) and
    > don't like soldering that is for sure..


    See above. Easy as pie and no lasting effects. If for any reason it doesn't
    work you can remove the 'paint' with a cotton bud and acetone and lift the
    bit of tape off the land. These lands are both on the outside row of the CPU
    so it makes it easier than it sounds. If you decide to do it reply here when
    you have the kit and I'll point you to instructions, or give them to you
    myself.

    > but a dual core 2.93 for 200
    > sounds really tempting.. what kind of cooling have you got?


    I'm using the stock Intel cooler that was included with the $200 CPU and,
    under the maximum on-die temps I get are in the high 50's (°C) reading with
    both Core Temp and TAT, under 100% x 2 load. In real-world use you probably
    wouldn't get near that sort of load.
    --
    TTFN

    Shaun.

    > > This system is now (roughly) 5 times as powerful as the Barton
    > > 3200+ it replaced and uses no more electricity. In fact a bit less,
    > > especially at idle. In fact a lot less. At 100% CPU usuage it's a
    > > /bit/ less but how often is this powerhouse going to be at 100% on
    > > both cores? I used to be a die-hard AMD guy. Now it's Intel all the way
    > > since
    > > they realised their mistake in dropping the Tualatin and went back
    > > to short-pipeline architecture. The great thing about the BSEL mod
    > > that I did is it's so risk-free. A cotton-bud with a bit of acetone
    > > will undo it in seconds. Not like the old "break off pin x..."
    > > pinmods.
    > > > I really cant see the point of trying to overclock an AMD based
    > > > machine, you buy it for its high bang for its buck not for how
    > > > far it can be "stretched".....ie if I was serios on a CPU cooler
    > > > it would have to be a watercooled one, so thats $300 odd and a
    > > > well heat piped or even wet cooled chipset'd motherboard, so
    > > > thats another $500+ in which case I would be looking for a major
    > > > CPU to match that cost....for a no expense spared setup AMD would
    > > > not feature....

    > >
    > > My OCed E4500 is using the stock cooler and hits 57°C on both cores
    > > after being at 100% load for a few minutes. It doesn't go higher.
    > > Well within specs.
     
    ~misfit~, Oct 26, 2007
    #19
  20. thingy

    Puddle Guest

    Re: Cheap fast C2D. Was: Re: I think I just fell in love.........non-multipliedCPU....

    ~misfit~ wrote:
    > Somewhere on the interweb "Puddle" typed:
    >> ~misfit~ wrote:
    >>> Way more overclockable is right. I bought a $100 Asus Socket 775
    >>> mATX mobo with *zero* overclocking options (*and* it takes DDR RAM
    >>> and AGP cards, great for me, upgrade on a budget). I bought an
    >>> E4500 Core2Duo 800MHz FSB CPU that runs stock at 2.2GHz with 2MB L2
    >>> cache. I did a fairly simple (less than 10 minutes, $20 for
    >>> conductive paint of which I used 1/100th and a tiny bit of
    >>> sellotape) mod to two adjacent BSEL lands on the CPU and now the
    >>> CPU bootstraps at 1066MHz FSB! 2.93GHz dual-core that has grunt to
    >>> spare from a $200 CPU! No vcore increase (my mobo, a P5PE-VM,
    >>> doesn't give the option anyway) and it runs Orthos all day without
    >>> a mistake. $300 all-up for the upgrade as I'm using my old case,
    >>> RAM AGP card etc.

    >>
    >> I am interested in what you have done. I unfortunately have to watch
    >> the spending on computer parts these days due to a list of other
    >> things that are apparently more important :(.

    >
    > I know the feeling. I had to renew my car insurance and passport in the last
    > couple months and didn't think I'd be able to get a "new PC" any time soon.
    >
    >> I have a 6600 gt agp so am debating on whether to get a similar board
    >> to you and then i just have to fork out on the board and cpu... then
    >> the next time around new board and pci-e graphics card i guess....
    >> then id have to get ddr2 memory too... damn there is always something
    >> heh, pc's are money pits...

    >
    > Yeah. I figure, with the upgarde I've just done I'm good for a few more
    > years, extending the life of my 2GB DDR RAM and my AGP card. By the time I
    > need (or, more likely, want) anything faster it'll all be new gen stuff
    > anyway. DDR3 and 45nm fab 4/8/16 core CPUs (Which, incidently, won't run in
    > a lot of today's mobos) will be ubiquitous or even superceded.
    >
    >> Though I am wondering how long I can put the upgrade off from my 2.8
    >> p4..

    >
    > If you want to use one of these "cross-over" motherboards that uses DDR and
    > AGP then you don't have long. They're fast dissapearing. Hardware retailers
    > like to sell you more stuff, not boards that let you get away with re-using
    > your old kit. If I were looking to upgrade in the next year or 18 months on
    > a budget I'd do it now. (LOL, actually I just did!)
    >
    >> Do you think supreme commander will run on a 2.8p4 with a 6600 gt
    >> on low settings?

    >
    > I'm not familiar with the game. sorry.


    Ahh sorry must have mixed up people on that one. It is a RTS, basically
    the new Total Annihilation but on a massive scale.. It brings the best
    multicore cpu's to their knees in some battles with the settings on high
    etc...

    >
    >> Was the Overclocking easy to do?

    >
    > As long as you have reasonable eyesight and steady hands it's easy as pie.
    > There are two 'lands' on the CPU bottom next to each other, BSEL1 and BSEL2,
    > which output a signal to the mobo to tell it what FSB to boot up at. All you
    > have to do is apply a sliver of tape over BSEL1 to insulate it, then smear a
    > small blob of conductive paint with a needle (rear windscreen defogger
    > repair paint) so that the socket gets the signal from BSEL2 on both BSEL
    > pins. (There are other mods out there to do the same thing but none are as
    > safe or relaible as this one.)
    >
    > Then; Voila! The CPU boots as a 1066FSB instead of a 800FSB. I've 'done' two
    > CPUs now and both took about 10 minutes each (then 30 minutes for the paint
    > to dry) and worked right first time. A 2.2GHz CPU beomes a 2.93GHz CPU. I
    > just started SETI again for the hell of it and it's chewing through the
    > units!
    >
    >> (i am not electronics genius) and
    >> don't like soldering that is for sure..

    >
    > See above. Easy as pie and no lasting effects. If for any reason it doesn't
    > work you can remove the 'paint' with a cotton bud and acetone and lift the
    > bit of tape off the land. These lands are both on the outside row of the CPU
    > so it makes it easier than it sounds. If you decide to do it reply here when
    > you have the kit and I'll point you to instructions, or give them to you
    > myself.


    Cool I will get in touch if I decide to go ahead. It is very tempting
    though...


    >
    >> but a dual core 2.93 for 200
    >> sounds really tempting.. what kind of cooling have you got?

    >
    > I'm using the stock Intel cooler that was included with the $200 CPU and,
    > under the maximum on-die temps I get are in the high 50's (°C) reading with
    > both Core Temp and TAT, under 100% x 2 load. In real-world use you probably
    > wouldn't get near that sort of load.
     
    Puddle, Oct 26, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Stephen J. Rush

    Re: Prove important update [I hope nobody fell for this scam]

    Stephen J. Rush, Dec 29, 2003, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    459
    Stephen J. Rush
    Dec 29, 2003
  2. Kat
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    455
    LnkWizard
    May 12, 2004
  3. Audi S4 pilot
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,097
    Audi S4 pilot
    Nov 28, 2004
  4. John Horner
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    546
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Ah, The Joys Of Pre-Multiplied Alpha...

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 16, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    390
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Oct 17, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page