I overclocked my old system and it works great, improvement

[Wapas]

I have an oldy but a goody, 478 socket with the Rambus 1066 RDram. this board used the 850e chip. That is the only chip in its day that the P-4 ever really performed with. I remember all those (OLD) AMD/Intel test with the AMD on the AMD chipset and the P-4 on anMSI board with the 645 chipset (POS). Anyways, I overclocked the x850XT AGP card to 580mhz and 590mhz, core and mem. Boy what a difference. I can reallu see the framerates smooth out. I always run everything maxed at 1600x1200. I used that Riva software. Very easy and seems to work great so far. It even tests it for you.
REgards, James

 

[chuckshissle]

Do you mind posting your benchmarks?

 

[Wapas]

sure, but I dont have it hooked up right now. I can post them next week.

 

[tenaciousleydead]

wait wait wait you put a x850 into a p4 using rambus? lol, ok do some hl2 benchs then we can see how cpu intensive it is. Thank You.

 

[hashv2f16]

haha that's what i was thinking tenacious... is that sys. a waste of a great card?

 

[tenaciousleydead]

yeah i think id buy a 9800pro max for that system

 

[Nytro]

or not? That p4 with rambus memory is 2 times faster than ur Duron OC. U should buy a GF2 GTS 4 ur computer, the 9800 is not the best choice .............BTW, he should post some bench results, i am curious to see an x850 with rambus

 

[tenaciousleydead]

dude you a friggin stupid my duron is basically up in the 2800 performance range with this big oc on a 400Mhz bus, rambus ram is crap or else we'd be using it today maybe you should think about that.

 

[Wapas]

I guess the bias 1 sided crowd will never understand how things work. First I see people making things up. If you had a clue about anything but your 20 dollar durron, you would know the 850e chip with 1066 Rambus was by far the fasted thing out there at the time. We compared the AMD to intel on a real mother board, the Asus PT533 and it was nearly double any amd. In fact, the 1.6a outperformed the fasted AMD at the time. The silly sales pitch you fell for was comparing an intel p-4 on a 645 chipset, not the 850e with 1066 rambus. It was very expensive and that had a lot to do with guys like you that work at McDonalds not buying it. And you may want to read up, if you dont take my word for it. Toms hardware can explain to you why rambus failed. It was expensive and it was about as fast as it could go at 1066. It is still faster clock than DDR2, but the memory subsystem is dated compared to ddr2, and DDR2 does have much greater throuput. But remember, Rambus was out when SDram was dominant and still outperformed DDR. Of course DDR2 is better, b ut you will never get the same performace on some old duron cpu that a 478 p-4 3.06 with 533 fsb can deliver. sorry to write something so negative, but I can not stand to hear this lame, uninformed sales pitch anymore.

 

[tenaciousleydead]

man cool down, i am not a sales person but personnaly from the benchmarks ive seen, my system has outperformed the 2.2p4(sisoftsandra) so yes i do believe that. and is all you need to understand to do is how to read so you can look at the stupid benchmarks. you know what find me some benchmarks that show "double the performance of any amd out on the market" which by the way what core was that? and then i will believe you. and it dosent matter what was out then, the point of the amd nameing obviousley refers to the speed of that based on intel, so itd be silly for you to say a 2.2p4 outperformed a 1800xp(ofccourse!) to sum this up i need information to make a conclusion. and ddr sdram is better for amd because of the tighter timings unlike that of the ddr2 which trys to make up for that in bandwhich. and i know cant ouptperform a 3.06Ghz intel i never said i could i said i could outperform the 2.2p4, so stop being such a dick.

 

[Wapas]

Ok, I ran 3dmark at 1600x1200, with D3D Pure Hardware T&L, 32 bit, 24 bit z buffering, 32 bit textures, double buffering and FSAA 4 samples. That is much higher than default settings, so you have to use the same settings to compare this hardware. I got 12711 3dmarks, then 12534. Here is the hardware info, I can sent the 3dmark file if someone wants it.
System Info Version: 2.2
Operating System: Microsoft Windows XP
Processors: 2 x Intel Pentium® 4 @ 3.07 GHz
Graphics Card: RADEON X850 Series
Total Physical Memory: 1 GB
Free Physical Memory: 714.89 MB
Motherboard Manufacturer: ASUSTeK Computer INC.
Motherboard Model: P4T533-C

 

[tenaciousleydead]

i think him(cant exactly speak for him) and me ment with your old 2.2p4, and what was the point of this thread anyway? there are no questions to be answered, and usually when you overclock stuff it does tend to perform better...

 

[Wapas]

I cant help it, I am a dick. Also, I have not been working on computers or playing with mine for a few years. Now that my house is done, I am messing around again, and I dont know all the new stuff. I am sure though, that the info I have been getting about intel cpu is bogus. People tell me to throw it away, it is junk, ect. I only got on this website to get some info and help some other folks that were worse off than me. I used to work with a bunch of AMD fanbois and I guess I still have memories of thier child like minds. Guess I did not need to say so much, but hey, look at the posts I was responding to. Some joker claims an X850 is too good for this mb and cpu is dead wrong. They are a perfect match. this thing still rocks and plays games in full res and full detail. It is only an AGP card and 4x agp slot, so I dont see what is so great about this almost 2 year old video card. It was much much much slower in my Dell by the way.

 

[RichPLS]

I had a 850e chipset using Rambus 800 memory, I still do, it might even work. That was one of the best at the time.
Dont worry what others say, if it works for you and is fast enuf, why else would what anyone else matter?

 

[tenaciousleydead]

so your are saying that you got absolutly no fps gain from your move up to a 3.06? man sucks for you, just goes to show how crappy they are(obviousley im just kidding). i dont care i am not a fanboy, i only have the best price/performance parts because i do not have alot of money and im not spending 100 more on a cpu i can get for 100 less and have the same performance, ok. and withough benches from your p42.2 you have proved absolutly nothing to me except that these rants are getting to be retarted. and every cpu at some point in time was never a piece of junk. i know there are alot of amd fanboys on here that do not know what they are talking about, and you cannot clump in the entire base of amd fanboys as having childish minds, thats just retarted. and thats specifically why i requested hl2 benchmarks because often the cpu is way more utilized than the graphics card, not some dumbass 3dmarks which by the way is for gpus not cpus if you couldnt tell. and your cpu is bottlenecking your gpu(your 2.2p4) the 3.06 offcourse not as much.

 

[Wapas]

I have no idea what 2.2 p-4 you are talking about. I never even owned one. But you must have some other post mixed up with mine. I was only talking about the gameplay at first . I just posted the 3dmark because someone asked. By the way, this is a 3d chip part of the forum. Not CPU. I ran sandra on the cpu, mem/cache, ect. It rated over the others and the memory was way over the AMD ath/opt 3800 in Sandra. Just wondering where this 2.2 thing came from.

 

[HalfHuman]

first of all i don't understand why u use the term "amd fan boys". it's offending to some including me. i don't like intel but that does not give me the right to talk shit.

i still haven't understood what machine do u have. is it a 2,2ghz p4 or is that the oc-ed speed?

rimms are dead and burried like other stupid ideas from intel. that doesn't mean that they aren't working but thinking at the price they had those days it makes me laugh thinking at the performance gains.

ur system could be a bottleneck for the video card but not that much. x850xt is still a force even on a older computer and even on agp4x. it won't perform as good as it could but it still behave decent. it is rather an expensive card for the computer u have though. it's like putting gold on the door handle of an old car. it could look good in certain cases (though i doubt) but it still isn't better looking than a new car.

if u feel that ur p4 is so strong post some pcmark2002 scores and i'll post some duron 1,6@2ghz scores on dual channel ddr.

 

[tenaciousleydead]

wait so then you have a 3.06 running on rambus?

 

[tenaciousleydead]

yeah i donno why i though that i guess i figured "old" then somehow got that...hmm what a waste of words.

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

wait so then you have a 3.06 running on rambus?

He has the best rig available at the time. I remember AMD couldn't even touch a 3.06GHz running on RAMBUS at the time.

Then AMD released there AthlonXP 3000+ and 3200+. While Intel countered with there 3.0C and 3.2C processors.

Intel was then at the top of the pack for a year before the Athlon64 finally surfaced.

Now AMD is in front no matter what an Intel fanboy tells you.

 

[hashv2f16]

hey hows the x1900xtx 512 going? how well does it OC and is it worth the $1800?

**i mean $600 sorry, wrong currency conversion

 

[Wapas]

Hey, thanks for the interest. I have 2 x1900xt not xtx. But, they clock as high or higher than the xtx stock. I think it is amazing but with the new monitor, I still dont get smooth fast perfect graphics at 1920x1200 in farcry with everything maxed. I had expected it to do that. But I must say, the quality is stunning. I have everything always set to high or highest and FSAA, anisotropic, ect.
The 3Dmark 06 advanced score with Anisotropic , high detail, all set to highest settings that will run all tests yields 7902 marks. Pretty good, not water cooling or anything silly like that.
Regards,
James