pc upgrade

menace · Post by **menace** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:07 pm

Hey guys got new upgrade on my pc, not the one i wrote here above on title but here are the spec.

( I didnt even plan it but i got the asus Radeon 5850 and than i thought ok lets look ;O )

AMD Processor Phenom II X4 965 Black E, sAM3, 3.40GHz,quad-core,BOX,125W

Asus Mainboard M4N68T V2,sAM3, ATX,NF630a,DDR3,PCIe

Asus Grafic Radeon EAH5850/2DIS,1GB,256 bit , GDDR5,DP,2xDVI,HDMI,PCIe

Kingston memory HyperX Gen DDR3,1333-4GB KIT ( i got x2 total of 8 GB)

OCZ Power ModXStream Pro 600WATT, 80PLUS,Modular,135mm Fan

Win7 Experience Index score is

processor 7,4

memory 7,5

Graphics 7,7

gaming graphics 7,7

primary hard disk ( next month new one ) 5,9

Total of all those things above i paid = 431,95 euro

i think is not that bad for a upgrade xD

}TCP{Coco · Post by **}TCP{Coco** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:40 pm

Very nice! I could use such a CPU as well. But 125W is a lot, damn.

The HD somehow always seems to be the slowest part in the Windows 7 performance index. It's exactly the same here. I guess you need a SSD HD to have 7.0 and more.

menace · Post by **menace** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:44 pm

ye i was looking and still much money for it ill wait couple months for it but the what i hear if u buy SSD HD never buy one under 60 GB will be broke faster then u think O.O

}TCP{Coco · Post by **}TCP{Coco** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:48 pm

SSDs have advantages and disadvantages. I still think they're too expensive for what you get, so I wouldn't advise to buy one today, but better wait a few more months.

menace · Post by **menace** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:05 am

ye i will xD thnx for advise ^^

NmS · Post by **NmS** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:07 pm

I got an SSD in my new pc. Gives 7,9 score in Win 7 index, like all the other components. It doesn't go beyond 7,9?

Post by **}TCP{Wolf** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:12 pm

}TCP{Coco wrote:Very nice! I could use such a CPU as well. But 125W is a lot, damn.

Actually this CPU is extremely energy efficient for a QUAD and scales from 800 Mhz to 4 Ghz (OC) as needed. It even goes so far that if you assign a single CPU core to ut2k4, it only upclocks it to around 2,2 Ghz and keeps the other 3 cores at 800 Mhz, running the game in highest details with no lag at about 50% its maximum clock rate. If the CPU native readouts can be believed, the CPU had an energy consumption of 1 to 4 Watts on the desktop when idle!

}TCP{Coco · Post by **}TCP{Coco** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 2:35 pm

Very nice feature! I wonder if the Intel quad cores have it too?

Post by **}TCP{Wolf** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:13 pm

All "unlocked" and even most "locked" CPUs scale to some extend, the "unlocked" ones just do extremely well so, but yea Intel does too

Btw if you want my AMD quad let's talk

}TCP{Coco · Post by **}TCP{Coco** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:16 pm

Haha... you got another one already? But this would require a new board as well...

menace · Post by **menace** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:41 pm

i tell u this x4 from Phenom is fast everything i do on it its like 80% faster than before for me lol

Post by **}TCP{Wolf** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:59 pm

}TCP{Coco wrote:Haha... you got another one already?

I just slaughtered my old overkill server which was on standby in the corner and made it my new gaming rig (trial). It's an LGA 775 Quad Core 2,6 Ghz (Q6something). I'm experimentally overclocking it to 3 Ghz (without voltage increase) as the company I bought it from certified the CPU to be overclockable stably up to 3,3 Ghz - so, I am using half the added speed it was tested for, on idle it runs at 1,8 Ghz, much underclocked.

My personal feelings on it are, that the overall speed appears to be around the same now as the AMD, however, it is less energy efficient and scales a lot less good. For example, the AMD could clock single cores differently, whereas the Intel can not, it's either all cores go up/down or none, so if you run an application that only utilizes a single core (like ut2k4) you always waste energy as the 3 other cores are clocked higher doing nothing - would be interesting to check with an Intel I3/5/7 what they can do. For mass encryption/decryption this system and the AMD don't vary much as parallel processing is directly supported these days by Truecrypt, so as long as you can make use of all 4 cores the efficiency is surprisingly good actually. On the downside of course, the CPU has a far shallower range of multipliers, and of course the FSB/DDR dependency which is simply an abhorrent design flaw of this generation and makes extensive memtests an absolute necessity...

The abilities of this system are clearly fewer compared to the new AMD, but I have run several of these perfectly stable so I pretty much don't get any surprises here.

NmS · Post by **NmS** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 4:53 pm

So far from what I have seen from my new cpu (i7 2600k), it clocks down to 1600 Mhz @ 0,9 volts at idle. When a single threaded application is run it will go up at Turbo boost of 3,8 Ghz on a single core (normal cpu speed is 3,4 Ghz). It won't clock all the cores to that speed.

But haven't been able to test much, will play with the system soon. Gonna see to how far I am able to overclock the Turbo. I'd like to keep the 1600 Mhz at idle, which my energy bill will appreciate

menace · Post by **menace** » Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:04 pm

ok last upgrade was today =) i got a new CPU cooler Noctua NH-U9B SE2

and mine CPU is much colder now ^^ 30Â° !!! without water cooling

menace · Post by **menace** » Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:20 pm

btw my ping went to 20 without lag at all could that be because of the cpu? strange

www.tcpclan.net

Welcome to the Board

pc upgrade