Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Overclocking Penryn = dead end at 400mhz?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 28, 2007 11:43:30 PM

Hello, new to the boards here. I'm looking to build a new computer in early January. I'm on a strict budget and have been out of the technology loop for a few years, so I've been doing a lot of reading about current components the last few days.

I want a somewhat future-proof machine, meaning I would like if my processor lasted about 2-3 years. The only hardware-intensive thing I do on my computer is play games. I've been looking at new processors and I've decided that I want to buy an Intel processor. I had settled on the Q6600, but with Penryn right around the corner, I figured it would be a good idea to wait and see.

I read that Penryn processors will be shipped with a higher FSB and lower multiplier (I read this on a different forum, and currently I'm in an Internet cafe in Beijing on a time limit but I'll dig up the thread later on) and thus will not be able to overclock like the Q6600. I read that at 400mhz, the Q9450 will be around 3.0ghz while (I THINK this is correct) the Q6600 maxes out at 3.6ghz, since most motherboards don't support FSBs of over 400mhz.

Now here's my question: will the X48 chipset support FSBs higher than 400 (1600)? If not, it doesn't seem like buying a Penryn processor to overclock makes sense compared to buying a Q6600. I know the cache is larger but I'm not sure if that will justify the purchase if the price is higher.

So IF the X48 chipset DOES support FSBs of over 400, I was thinking of buying a solid X48 board and maybe get an E2160 or E4300 and wait until Penryn prices drop a little, and then upgrade to a cheaper quad core Penryn and overclock it when I have the money.

If the X48 chipset DOESN'T support >400Mhz, I'm not really sure what to do. Should I just buy a cheap P35 board w/ the Q6600? Or a cheap Penryn dual core?

Thanks a lot in advance! :) 
November 28, 2007 11:53:26 PM

Quote:
I want a somewhat future-proof machine, meaning I would like if my processor lasted about 2-3 years.


Everyone wants a PC that will last forever lol... Unfortuneately no one can predict technological advancement. Yes you could buy a Q6600/Q9450 - its not just about cpu remember - a decent rock solid motherboard helps... Look.... if ya got a PC that ya can use for the time being - i'd wait - Penryn is probs gonna cause headaches for some popular motherboards...

November 28, 2007 11:59:07 PM

I don't really have PC I can use for the time being, though. Right before I left for China, my video card fried and my old processor is a 2.4 P4c @ 3.0 ghz so I figured it was time to upgrade, haha.

It's just that the Penryn EEs can go to 4ghz air cooled, but they've got an unlocked multiplier. It seems like the processors most of us will be buying will be gimped due to our motherboards, so I'm not sure if it will be worth the money IF X48 boards can't go over 400 FSB.
Related resources
November 29, 2007 12:09:29 AM

hmmmm... 4ghz (aircooled) thats to be seen....

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Intel-QX9770-X48-X38-QX96...

Note it says "highest" is 400mhz.... Theres no reason if memory runs at 400mhz (1600QDR) that it cant be overclocked raising the cpu speed... I suppose it depends what the motherboard/memory can manage... Remember motherboards that support 1600QDR are not numerous atm....
November 29, 2007 12:23:40 AM

Most P35 Boards can hit 500FSB w/o an issue.
Please simply ignore the rantings of that author.

He wrote a really bad article to start and has been trying to defend it.
You will note there is not thread linked from the "Update" article and for good reason.

1) Intel does not support ANY chipset. That is the role of the MoboMakers.

2) Intel designs their Chips to be OC'd. Otherwise the FSB would be locked as well.

3) THG has demonstrated and recommended boards based upon their ability to go well beyond 400FSB and often beyond 500FSB.


Yes, It's true.

Intel wants you to buy the newer X48 Chipset, but in reality it's just the X38 Chipset just tweaked.

When looking at Mobos for OCing, look at the Chipset cooling built in by the Mobo manufacturer or look at add on cooling.

The same that applies to CPUs.

Also, Intel is NOT increasing the FSB in general.

The majority of the Penryns will be 1333 FSB just like their current latest chips. Only a small number will be 1600FSB.

Also, the Power envelope the author goes on about, is also not an issue since these chips use LESS power per their own extensive tests.

November 29, 2007 12:25:42 AM

WazzaUK said:
Unfortuneately no one can predict technological advancement.


Actually Gordon E. Moore, ironically of Intel, was pretty good at it.

I'm having the same dilemma right now though, but I think i'm going to just save some money and wait to see how much the Penryn will cost.
November 29, 2007 12:58:40 AM

I think a decent P35 will do. There has been reporting of P35 chipset hitting at least 450+ Mhz with dual core, and ~430Mhz with quad core. (providing you don't go for extreme cooling. I've seen people doing 475Mhz on quad core on that).

The point is, how far are you willing to OC your Penryn? If you're looking at 4Ghz, then you might have to drop the big bucks to get QX9650, instead of the chipset.

But if you just want a moderate OC like 3.6Ghz, then P35 + Q9450 might do the trick.
November 29, 2007 1:09:50 AM

zenmaster said:

2) Intel designs their Chips to be OC'd. Otherwise the FSB would be locked as well.


That's not true....they don't lock the FSB because it is a waste of their time and money to do so; besides, more than one piece of hardware is affected by FSB, so locking it would not be an option.
November 29, 2007 1:14:11 AM

monsterrocks said:
That's not true....they don't lock the FSB because it is a waste of their time and money to do so; besides, more than one piece of hardware is affected by FSB, so locking it would not be an option.


I think this statement is more accurate:

Intel intentionally leave a large headroom for future clock increase.
November 29, 2007 2:03:30 AM

Thanks a lot! I'll do some research into motherboards... if I can find a solid, well-cooled P35 board, I think I'll buy with a E2160 or 4300 (and OC them, of course) and wait a bit for Penryn quad prices to drop and pick one up later in the year when more games are multithreaded (afaik, only Crysis is multithreaded, right?).

Does that sound like an okay plan? I've read countless threads on X38 v. P35 so I think I'll stick with P35, and hopefully by the time DDR3 is affordable, I'll be ready to update my whole system.
November 29, 2007 2:59:10 AM

their quad multis are too low, reaching 4ghz will be tough. you have to spend xtra cash for higher end cpu's or wait for 1066 variants(if they'll release them) and for higher clocked revisions later on.
November 29, 2007 3:19:53 AM

Will the Penryn with 6mb cache per core and SSE (whatever that is) have a notable performance increase, clock for clock, compared to the Q6600?
a c 127 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
November 29, 2007 3:59:00 AM

in media apps YES :) 
as long as they are programed to take advantage of it....

check this out

http://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/te4xp.html

332(sec) without SSE4 and 251(sec) with SSE4

but it looks like they use all SSE instruction sets....so time will tell when more software uses it....all i know is now days without SSE(came on the P3's I think) things just SUCK....i tried an old Athlon and a slower P3 killed it just from SSE alone(flash gets a good boost with SSE instructions)
November 29, 2007 4:17:41 AM

zenmaster said:
Most P35 Boards can hit 500FSB w/o an issue.


On duals, yes. On quads, it would be unlikely.

That said, a 'decent' P35 board should still do 450FSB even with quads. X38 boards are doing 485FSB, and with more mature BIOS revisions 500FSB is not out of the question.

Given the choice, I'd take the Q9450 over the Q6600 any day. It has 5% higher IPC (more with SSE4 apps) and runs MUCH cooler.

A Q6600 @ 3.6GHz usually takes 1.4V or more to achieve stability. It would be pulling ~165W under full load at such speeds. A Q9450 would probably be able to do 3.6GHz with stock voltage, putting it under 100W under full load.

Of course, the biggest issue with the Q9450 is the 8x multi. You would need a good mobo to get the most out of it, but a good P35 board should be up to the task.
a c 172 à CPUs
a c 197 K Overclocking
November 29, 2007 4:26:19 AM

This is a good time to wait a couple of months. There are some indications that some of the recent P35, X38, and - especially in my case - the 680i motherboards may not support the Yorkfield CPU's. Apparently, most of the motherboard manufacturers certified their boards using Intel engineering sample (ES) CPU's.

And apparently the production CPU's are just a little different. Some people think that that's Intel's way of selling more X48 chipsets. Others think that Intel is trying to punish nVidia for refusing to license SLI.
November 29, 2007 4:39:28 AM

jsc said:
This is a good time to wait a couple of months. There are some indications that some of the recent P35, X38, and - especially in my case - the 680i motherboards may not support the Yorkfield CPU's. Apparently, most of the motherboard manufacturers certified their boards using Intel engineering sample (ES) CPU's.

And apparently the production CPU's are just a little different. Some people think that that's Intel's way of selling more X48 chipsets. Others think that Intel is trying to punish nVidia for refusing to license SLI.


Oh dear, looks like MrsBytch's FUD is working.

You are right that 680i doesn't work with Yorkfield (hopefully it can be sorted out with a BIOS update, good luck) but P35 and X38 most definitely DO work with Yorkfield.
November 29, 2007 4:43:50 AM

I'm using a QX9650 @ 3.6 GHz -- it was ridicously easy to overclock on just air cooling (Zalman). FSB is at 1600Mhz no problems on crappy DDR2 PC6400 memory on an older Asus P35 based motherboard. Zero voltage changes.

4GHz should be easy with this CPU.

Since SLI and Crossfire doesn't appear to be working to well with most DX10 titles, I wouldn't waste any money on a dual card setup (been their, done that, hated it).

Oddly, my FSX + Acceleration in DX10 Preview mode have doubled over my older X6800.
November 29, 2007 6:37:22 AM

When is x48 being released? Will any of them support DDR2? When is the price of DDR3 expected to drop to sane levels?
!