http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1062/intel_p35_bearlake_chipset_performance_preview/index.html
Not sure why the review is so glowingly positive, the performance difference between P965 and Bearlake at the same FSB is only 1-2%.
The good news is that Bearlake is fabbed at 65nm,
so it runs cooler and can probably hit higher FSBs than P965.This will be
very important for the enthusiast(overclocking) crowd, when you consider that the base FSB will be 333 instead of 266. With the E6850 having a 9x multiplier, a 400FSB will only get you 3.60GHz(600MHz O/C). :x
isnt this the inversed?
since the bearlake already sports 333 FSB, and since most boards hit the wall betwen 350-400 FSB...
shouldnt 266 fsbbased chips overclock more than their 333 counterparts?Yeah, that's why i'm saying...that hopefully the new chipsets will hit higher FSB's in order to get the overclock's on 333FSB processors.
ie: Let's assume we have an
X6800 on a P965-975 board.
To hit 3.60GHz we have many combinations.
11x327=3597
10x360=3600
9x400=3600
8x450=3600
7x514=3598
6x600=3600(GL
)
Now, let's assume we have an
E6850 on a Bearlake chipset board.
To hit 3.60GHz we can do:
9x400=3600
8x450=3600
7x514=3598
6x600=3600...No different than the options with an
E6600(except hopefully better Si/better potential) or even
E4300 ....for that matter.
Now lets's say we want to hit the magical 4GHz.
E6850/Bearlake.
We
have to hit a
minimum of 444x9=3996.
X6800/965-975
We can hit it with 444x9=3996 shouldn't be much problem
400x10=4000 better if our mobo/RAM aren't great
364x11=4004 possible with a low FSB mobo/so-so RAM.
I may be looking at this the wrong way, but i like the multipler options of the 266FSB processors. You're probably right about running a 266FSB chip on a Bearlake chipset board...overclocking better. :?