http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/0 [...] index.html

We look at what components make an ideal budget overclocker's system. With a few bucks and some guts, you too can have a low-cost rig that runs with the big boys.

Wow, you couldn't have used a worse overpriced cooler. BTF90 easily dominates that cooler and costs only $40 w/o rebate less with. Should have gone with a fully enabled Conroe instead of the gimped E4XXX. I would have liked to have seen results with a E6600. And maybe to save money get a HD2900 or 8800GTS640Mb.

Ok, I understand that the C2D is the fastest CPU, however the best value? I've been over clocking since my 486 DX2 50! I read toms back when the Celeron 300A was hot... mine was not so hot. I read toms back when the Celeron 1.6A was hot.. mine was good. I believe overclocking is a great way to get a little more out of your money.

Here's my issue, toms has always gotten great results. To get the results posted in this article you need to pull great memory, a solid motherboard, and a solid CPU. If any one of those three comes up short, your hosed. Ok so you buy better memory, or MB, or CPU, there goes the budget.

Which brings me to my point. In all this C2D talk, people seem to have forgotten the X2 6000+ for 160 bucks! In test the cpu was 120 bucks and the cooler 55! That's 175. So with zero effort the out of the box X2 steps in with solid performance. Tweak, even 10 - 20% which is MUCH more likely to happen and you just beat this heavily overclocked system.

Here's a little something for you all to chew on... My Celeron 1.6A, which was OC'd to 2.4G, served me well for about 3 years. The system was used in an office for about 8-10 hours a day M-F. Well, BSDs became common place. Took me a week of testing to identify the CPU failed! I replaced PSU, Memory, Video, and motherboard before I suspected the CPU. Have you ever tried to find a replacement part for an old system? Talk about tough! Moreover, talk about expensive! If you consider time and effert used/lost in the trouble shooting, I just paid for an initial high end system!

I personally like to retire my OC'd systems to lesser use. It is very bad when a retired computer fails. So, this "75% overclock" way risky. If you get the right stuff to hit the 75% mark, how long will it last. Will your budget be cut short because of the catastrophic failure and now your wife AND you need a new pc?

I am greatly saddened that all these "high end" websites consistently overlook the the AMD value. A 6000+ with a very safe 10-20% OC is a budget system with incredible performance and VERY low risk.

So how about Tom's, how about some review of a budget AMD system?

-Peter.

Wow, you're the king of drama, considering there's a measly 15$ difference between the two. Also, please produce some evidence that the BTF90 'easily dominates' the XP-90... and no, three degrees doesn't count as 'domination'.

Both of those points are covered in the review, your criticism might be more meaningful if you read it first...

Hi Peter,

I certainly don't have anything against AMD... hell, I was the one of the folks who insisted that the previous budget marathon build used an Athlon X2.

But I don't think an OCd 6000+ would have beat an OC'd Core 2 Duo like our e4300, even with high-end cooling.

The Core 2's are just really good overclockers.

plus, $160 get's alot closer to the e6600's price, and the 6000+ wouldn't hold up well at all against that CPU in an OC contest, methinks...

Clock for clock the 6000X2 doesn't match up with the Conroe, and their ability to easily achieve 50% overclocks. And regarding the XP-90, this thing is old, so old that they even mentioned the fact in the review. As such I couldn't find a modern review that contained the BTF90 that also contained the XP-90. Fact of the matter is, there are so many better coolers out there. They should have used something at least that the average consumer can get a hold of and outperforms the Xp90 to achieve a good air overclock.

Something smells a little fishy to me on Page 5 - I thought only the "extreme" versions of the core 2 lineup had unlocked multipliers. So any ideas how they changed it in these tests?

The only way that comes to mind is if Tom's used an Engineering Sample of the e4300 that includes the unlocked multiplier (which isn't available on retail/oem chips)

Good article cleeve. Like the details of your trials.

Unlike many here, I appreciate stuff like this. Not b/c it tells me what I can do (we all already know the core2 oc's nicely) but b/c it is a FUN article. Who cares if it is an "old" cooler or engineering sample? They still work don't they? (I also agree, 3 degrees does not warrant buying a new cooler. If I had one on hand that was only that far behind, I would use it too) Honestly, you did well mentioning the age of cooler and other components but apparently too many peeps are just not satisfied w/ that.

I enjoy stuff like this, it is fun for me to read and a nice break at work. Keep it up man.

rock on.

The asus P5B motherboard allows you to use lower multipliers with a retail/oem Core 2 Duo CPU.

I purchased both CPU and mobo from a local retailer...

So you're saying you just guess it would 'dominate' the XP-90 then?

Once again, this was mentioned in the review... and the Thermalright SI-128 was mentioned as an alternative.

I see your point, but I think you're overreacting a bit on the cooling front for a $15 dollar difference, while making wild performance claims you have no data to support.

Thanks dude.

Ahhh... somehow locked doesn't seem like the right term for the multiplier then.

Saying the multiplier is limited to 9x (for e4300) would make more sense IMHO... but oh well

It was a good article, but since when is $1200 a "budget" system, lol. To save some dollars, it would have been nice to see you use a cheaper cooler like the ACFreezer7 ($22 shipped from ewiz.com). I like the CPU choice, and I bet with a different motherboard, a higher overclock would have been reached. I do, however, understand that you had to "use what you had" at the moment. In my eyes, a [b]budget[b] overclocking system would be much cheaper (3600+, ACFreezer, 7900GS/x1950Pro) but would obviously not compete with the high-end rigs... but what true budget system will?

Nonetheless, kudos on the article.

Yep, its mostly up to the motherboard manf.

I can lower the multiplier on my ASRock board as well. This comes in handy on the oddly multiplied brisbanes (9.5x on my 3600+)

so $22 vs $55 would make that $1200 better? lol

Whole thing seemed pretty clear to me. Cleeve explains each choice in the article. Dunno why so many are having issue w/ it. Just read it for what it is man.

meh.

I don't know what kind of work you do, but to me $33 is a lot of money man. I'm not dissing the article, I like it. Just my opinion of budget is different, I guess.

well, he refered to the previous marathon where they defined a "budget" system as under $1k. Using THAT definition (regardless of what you or I think of as a budget system) he then says the 8800gtx put him over that but he needed it to compare w/ the big dogs. (which was the goal of this marathon)

IMO it was all explained really well.

As for the cooler... If I had a $55 cooler on my shelf or could BUY a $22 one that may or may not gain me some cooling... I would stick w/ the one on my shelf. (which is what they did if you read between the lines a bit )

Uh... my C2D E6600 has a 9x multiplier... what E6600 are you using???

IMO, the cooler wasn't even the limiting factor. We have e4300s down here clocking 3.15G on the stock cooler. If the article didn't mention that they tried to jump the strap by going straight to 400+ fsb, I would think the issue was with the NB strap.

I'm currently fooling around with a 945GC-A2 chipset board and what I noticed is that I can't get beyond 350fsb on the e4300 when using a Sata HDD (amazingly enough, I can do 370fsb on a B2 stepping e6300). I plunked in my old trusty IDE drive and broke 370fsb on the e4300 immediately following the replacement. I will need an after-market cooler before I can shoot for that 100+% OC.

The situation above tells me several things: Sata consumes more power than IDE - that may be a factor; Sata controller is on the NB, IDE on the SB (?) on the 945G-AC which may or may not be a factor.