Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

So... Do I stay with AMD or make the move to INTEL???

Last response: in CPUs
Share

Do I Stick with AMD or finallu jump ship to INTEL?

Total: 75 votes (7 blank votes)

  • AMD
  • 34 %
  • INTEL
  • 67 %
April 3, 2008 1:58:21 PM

My current build is awesome but keeps giving me random problems such as bios hangs and BSODs even random resets from time to time. Im pretty skilled at PC builds and have tried to pinpoint the issue for so long now without success that im just over it. The main problem being the inconsitency with the errors so tough to diagnose. Im not even O/Cing.
Anyway - im thinking of getting a new mobo and cpu - and just trying to make my mind up if i should jump ship now or wait, for, dunno... a better phenom??? Not sure if i can drop from my 6000+ @ 3.0 to a 2.4 phenom. I mean apart from some apps 4 cores are far from being utilized.

Ive been an AMD fanboy since i can remember but i do think that they really dissapointed the crowd with the latest chip release. I mean - come on!! 2.4ghz???!?!?!? Who are they kidding. It basically saying to me that if I want to UPgrade my PC i need to either jump to the power and seriously high power and stability of intel; or fry my build by horredously OCing my 6000+. Not much of a choice really.

So, if the general consensus is Intel - then any recomendations on a board and a CPU? I dont want the extremes etc but am keen for a decent high spec quad. Not that clued up on the boards either - i like to OC from time to time so prob need a flexible one in that respect.

Hope I can get some decent pointers from the THW experts... :sol: 
April 3, 2008 2:23:57 PM

An X2-6000+ is plenty... you'd be crazy to get rid of that rig now for the current batch of Intel CPUs (that are admittedly better than your X2, but not by a huge magnitude)

If it were me I'd wait for the next-gen Intel stuff to become available... if you're having trouble playing games, I imagine it's your GPU not your CPU that is holding you back.

And if you wait, Phenom might come around and be a viable upgrade option for you... saving you a crap-load of money in the process (assuming your board is compatible)
Related resources
a c 127 à CPUs
April 3, 2008 2:32:14 PM

From what has been shown and what Intel has given spec wise, Nehalem looks very promising and worth the wait.

They showed a 3.2GHz Nehalem quad core with their new HT called SMT(simultanious multithreading) for a total of 8 cores.

There is a post on this forum with a link to a video showing it doing particle physics for a game.

Wait for Nehalem. Or if you get antsy get a Q6600 :p 
April 3, 2008 2:46:56 PM

If you're having system problems NOW, and money is not an issue, I'd say try an Intel.
a c 133 à CPUs
April 3, 2008 2:51:19 PM

If you can, wait until 4/20 for Intel's price cuts, on the heels of AMD's price cuts of 4/7.
You don't say what mobo you have now, nor what GPU or PSU.
If you think you might prefer to stay with AMD, at least wait until 4/7; or buy a mobo now. If the mobo alone fixes your problem, you're done. If it doesn't, you can continue replacing after the price cuts.
Will you get a new case? Have you ruled out static or grounding related problems on your current case?
April 3, 2008 2:55:22 PM

Onus said:
If you can, wait until 4/20 for Intel's price cuts, on the heels of AMD's price cuts of 4/7.
You don't say what mobo you have now, nor what GPU or PSU.
If you think you might prefer to stay with AMD, at least wait until 4/7; or buy a mobo now. If the mobo alone fixes your problem, you're done. If it doesn't, you can continue replacing after the price cuts.


Speaking of a new AMD mobo... if you're going to go with that route, and think you'll be sticking with AMD a while longer yet, you may want to wait a few weeks anyhow. Nvidia's 780a chipset is supposed to be released tomorrow (4/4/08). I haven't seen any kind of reviews, but I know for a long time the 590a was considered the best AM2 chipset. Since 780a will be AM2+, it'll let you get a little more out of a Phenom. On paper, anyhow... we'll see what the reviews say.
April 3, 2008 3:06:48 PM

heck, im still using a 4400 X2 939 socket, the only reason i have to upgrade is *some* games are becoming CPU limited with my 8800GTX....

other than that i wont be upgrading my cpu or other components until the next revision of Intel and AMD chips, probably late 08, early 09.

i may upgrade my ram to 4GB if the price of my RAM ever comes down, the XMS Twin X stuff i have is still £100+ for 2gig. i use vista with SP1 now too, SP1 fixed alot of the complaints i had with vista, and i enjoy the speedy login/startup speed, compared to XP.
a b à CPUs
April 3, 2008 3:09:59 PM

Sounds like you need to regrease and reseat your cpu / hsf mate at the very least ... you might have thermal problems.

Sticking a high end graphics card in it will get you a better result than spending the same amount of money on a new mobo and cpu from Intel.

Unless your into apps that make use of a quad core then that might be a bit of a waste of money for a casual gamer ... plus the E8xxx series cpus are gret for gaming.

It is hard to offer you much advice because you havn't told us enough.

Flakes advice is also sound.

April 3, 2008 3:31:01 PM

Another problem that you might be having is the memory. Have you tried checking your RAM by using Memtest86 for a few hours? That should stress the memory and let you know if you have any faulty memory (Which could be the cause of your lockups and BSODs).

Also what is the rest of your system (PSU, GPU, etc), even though I don't think so, it could be that it's not getting enough power. I would honestly try to fix the issue before you go off buying a new platform, that would be money better saved for the next architectural change (Nehalem).
April 3, 2008 3:36:32 PM

DannyBoy27 said:
My current build is awesome but keeps giving me random problems such as bios hangs and BSODs even random resets from time to time. Im pretty skilled at PC builds and have tried to pinpoint the issue for so long now without success that im just over it. The main problem being the inconsitency with the errors so tough to diagnose. Im not even O/Cing.
Anyway - im thinking of getting a new mobo and cpu - and just trying to make my mind up if i should jump ship now or wait, for, dunno... a better phenom??? Not sure if i can drop from my 6000+ @ 3.0 to a 2.4 phenom. I mean apart from some apps 4 cores are far from being utilized.


I had a similar problem a couple years ago and after many headaches and replacing my video card, sound card, and trying different ram, I located the problem as the PSU. It would usually start the computer alright, but then the power would fluxuate or something else and the computer crashed. Since I put in the new PSU, no problems.

Since you're not overclocking, the AMD chips can do a fairly good job. They're not great chips, and they don't overclock as well as Intel chips, but the B3 Phenoms can be overclocked, with some reviewers getting it up to 2.8-2.9ghz and a couple sites getting 3.0ghz with a 9650 BE. The new Phenoms will be out this month and a 9650 would be a good chip to use. Its not blazingly fast, but its competent from everything I've read so far. There will also be a revision in the motherboards and the SB700 southbridge will come into use, a good impovement over the SB600.
April 3, 2008 3:44:06 PM

rodney_ws said:
An X2-6000+ is plenty... you'd be crazy to get rid of that rig now for the current batch of Intel CPUs (that are admittedly better than your X2, but not by a huge magnitude)

If it were me I'd wait for the next-gen Intel stuff to become available... if you're having trouble playing games, I imagine it's your GPU not your CPU that is holding you back.

And if you wait, Phenom might come around and be a viable upgrade option for you... saving you a crap-load of money in the process (assuming your board is compatible)



Took the words out of my mouth! :sol: 
April 3, 2008 3:48:56 PM

I agree with emp, try running memtest for a while (linux live cds also come with memory test you can use), and let us know the specs of what you're using now. The 6000x2 is still plenty of power. The money would be much better spent on new video card or memory.
April 3, 2008 3:54:57 PM

DannyBoy27 said:
My current build is awesome but keeps giving me random problems such as bios hangs and BSODs even random resets from time to time. Im pretty skilled at PC builds and have tried to pinpoint the issue for so long now without success that im just over it. The main problem being the inconsitency with the errors so tough to diagnose. Im not even O/Cing.
Anyway - im thinking of getting a new mobo and cpu - and just trying to make my mind up if i should jump ship now or wait, for, dunno... a better phenom??? Not sure if i can drop from my 6000+ @ 3.0 to a 2.4 phenom. I mean apart from some apps 4 cores are far from being utilized.

Ive been an AMD fanboy since i can remember but i do think that they really dissapointed the crowd with the latest chip release. I mean - come on!! 2.4ghz???!?!?!? Who are they kidding. It basically saying to me that if I want to UPgrade my PC i need to either jump to the power and seriously high power and stability of intel; or fry my build by horredously OCing my 6000+. Not much of a choice really.

So, if the general consensus is Intel - then any recomendations on a board and a CPU? I dont want the extremes etc but am keen for a decent high spec quad. Not that clued up on the boards either - i like to OC from time to time so prob need a flexible one in that respect.

Hope I can get some decent pointers from the THW experts... :sol: 


If you want to stay with amd, a b3 black edition phenom should oc to 3ghz with a voltage bump and high quality air cooling or water cooling. It'll be a reasonable gaming cpu. Otherwise get a q6600 and oc to 3.2. The 45nm quads with 6mb cache aren't clearly faster than the q6600, the b3 phenom reviews showed that quite clearly. The 12mb ones should be quite a bit better, but pricing and availability is a big issue.

p.s. have you tried any other forums with regard to your stability problems? apart from tom's, techspot is quite good.
a b à CPUs
April 3, 2008 4:18:22 PM

1st - In refernce to Flakes comment on waiting for memory prices to drop. This would be true for the DDR3 modules and for the Higer end DDR2 modules. For main stream DDR ( ie DDR2 800 ) prices probably will not drop, and infact may go up. Micron quote from financial wedsite ".. better balance between suppy and demand for Dram chips."
Memory chip companies are bleeding with the current price and have been for some time.

To the OP. since you appear to have ruled out Memory as an issue (Extensive memtest86 test) and overheating problems, And processor problems (orthos or prime 95) And PSU ( all voltages with in specs and stable). It is a possibility that the MB has degraded (Assume you have the lates Bios ver).

If your ready to "Use a bigger hammer to fix it" then you need a new build. Your probably not going to wait for Nehalem - No mother board yet and initial cost high.

If your a AMD fan, it is slightly lower cost and will beat your current system.

For slightly higher cost, I would recommend intel E8400, or quad with the 35 or 38 chipset. You already stated Overclocking, and intels line is much higher than AMd. Typically 3.2 -> 3.6 fairly common.

April 3, 2008 4:31:25 PM

Great & quick response guys, so thanks.

Damn - my sig is meant to have all my build info.

PSU : 700Wt Seasonic Modular
CPU: 6000+ @ 3ghz & thermal silver
GPU: 8800 ULTRA 768 ( 612 & 2160 )
Mobo: Crosshair 0905beta ( supports 1066 fully )
Ram: 4x1Gb OCZ 1066
Cooling : Antec 182. Lots of fans & 9700 cpu fan ( which pumps! )

So im pretty sure that is a decent build and cost me Zimbabwe's defecit.
I have tested everything. Ran a memtest a couple months ago when my PC wasnt getting past post ( with a handy little DETDRAM error on the poster ) and found a faulty chip which OCZ promptly replaced. It seems to lock up if i leave it on for the day so my initial thoughts is heat. MY GPU is running deadcold and that ULTRA using burns so my case is pretty cool inside. All fans are on high ( cause id rather burn out £6 fans than my hardware ). HDDs are cold and both speedfan and my Scythe Kama read my cores sitting at about 35-38idle and 45 to 55load so im out of options. Ill run a full memtest again on each individual dimm again this weekend to check again but the Orthos ram stress isnt giving any errors.

Could just be that the 6000+ is poked and needs a replacement. Or the Crosshair ( my third ) is fault, again ( im cursed ). Actually who knows. This build was meant to be awesome but has just given me grief.

If i run for too long it BSODs or reboots and then just sits there in post just before it starts running the ram count and checking IDEs etc. Never seen that before really so not sure what is causing it. I plug out and leave it for a while and then it seems to work again till the cycle commences again.

So that is why im keen to just change out my mobo and cpu for some cool and stable intel. Its a last resort really. Ive heard good things about people using the core 2 duos. Nice overclocking apparently and using 45.

Hope that helps.
April 3, 2008 4:47:36 PM

have you tried updating the bios? its clutching at straws but it helped me when i was at the end of my tether. If that hsf is quite heavy it might be flexing the mobo and causing issues. Now that really IS clutching at straws lol but i did see a hsf roundup/review a little while ago and the reviewer did say that one hsf was flexing the mobo and causing instability. Try, say, running your pc for a short spell resting on its side so that inside the case your hsf and the top edge of the graphics card are facing up.
April 3, 2008 4:51:28 PM

even though that PSU is great, I would try to see if the issue persists with another. The reason? ASUS mobos were known to have a few PSU issues (Can't remember which ones), that's why I'd try swapping that to see if it's the problem. Honestly if your Memtest86 passes, I wouldn't be surprised one bit if the problem was the motherboard... basically why I always pass on ASUS motherboards, don't feel like dealing with their crap.

If anything you should change, I'd change the motherboard even with a cheap one, it's better to have a working cheap motherboard than one of ASUS "Fantastic" products, but honestly you don't need or would actually find any advantage on building a new system, you are basically on the same boat as I am, next time that upgrading/rebuilding would be an option is after Nehalem is launched.
April 3, 2008 4:55:19 PM

mmm ...do you care to elaborate on the ASUS point? I like mine, but then again the onboard sound made crackling noises (real ones not tiny squeaks) and the onboard wifi was abysmal ...but apart from that it's perfect lol.
April 3, 2008 6:09:17 PM

lol why are you upgrading your AMD 6000+?? That's what I'm planing to upgrade to.
a c 127 à CPUs
April 3, 2008 7:15:24 PM

Huh.... I have used only Asus for the past 6-7 years and never had any problems. Always solid and the on board sound is always great, albiet it uses the CPC for processing power so I got a discrete sound card.

Other than that my P4Pe, P4P800 Deluxe and P5K-E WiFi/AP are all very good boards with great quality parts and lots of great features.
April 3, 2008 8:02:17 PM

doomsdaydave11 said:
lol why are you upgrading your AMD 6000+?? That's what I'm planing to upgrade to.

because he's having random crashes - read the OP :p 
April 3, 2008 8:43:40 PM

spoonboy said:
If you want to stay with amd, a b3 black edition phenom should oc to 3ghz with a voltage bump and high quality air cooling or water cooling.


I don't think that's really been proven at all. Until I see some solid reviews of B3's making into 3ghz land I wouldn't advertise that it will or may.
a c 133 à CPUs
April 3, 2008 8:44:32 PM

Maybe the NB and/or SB are overheating. Do you have measurements on those? Take the side off, aim a small household fan into it, and see if it no longer crashes.
April 3, 2008 8:48:06 PM

assuming that what you are doing will essentially be a new build (and i'm not sure if its sensible or not) I would go Intel
April 3, 2008 9:10:24 PM

TechnologyCoordinator said:
I don't think that's really been proven at all. Until I see some solid reviews of B3's making into 3ghz land I wouldn't advertise that it will or may.



Here's a thread I'm watching to see what kind of speed is possible:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=183025

3.5Ghz. (Although not verified, validated or tested for stability. But it booted. That's a start.)
April 3, 2008 10:00:03 PM

keithlm said:
Here's a thread I'm watching to see what kind of speed is possible:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=183025

3.5Ghz. (Although not verified, validated or tested for stability. But it booted. That's a start.)


Maybe it booted or maybe it's Photoshop.
When a poster refuses to provide something as simple as CPU-Z validation, you have to wonder.

I've seen quite convincing posts that are clearly fake and the poster admits to it, just to show how convincing they look.

The main reason I suspect fake is that the reviews I've read have required higher voltages to reach much lower speeds on the B3. While cooling can help, it's not likely to help maintain a voltage that low.

Tech-Report was the highest OC I saw and that was 3.0 at 1.6v. (Boot, Not Testing Stable.)
Others were about 1.5v for 2.8 Testing Stable.

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe a 2.8->3.6 OC w/o a volt increase even with good cooling.

Also, AMD itself admits that it did not make significant changes to the CPU in this stepping beyond bug fixes.
Certainly nothing major such as different metals of the such which would prevent leakage for such a high OC w such a relatively low voltage.

April 3, 2008 10:35:42 PM

zenmaster said:

The main reason I suspect fake is that the reviews I've read have required higher voltages to reach much lower speeds on the B3. While cooling can help, it's not likely to help maintain a voltage that low.


If it was fake... wouldn't the poster claim a higher voltage just to sound more legitimate?

If it's not fake than I doubt that anything could be done other than booting. (And personally I don't think it's fake.)
April 3, 2008 10:57:22 PM

I like AMD and even i think thats fake...3.5 when no-one else has reported above 2.9 stable? I do wish people wouldn't spread crap on the net, its one of the worst forms of keyboard warriorism. Why lie? its not as powerful but its cheaper....i'd love a nissan GT-R but i'll settle for a mondeo diesel since work pays me by the mile ;) 

Carod
a b à CPUs
April 3, 2008 11:17:28 PM

@OP:

Download UBCD and run Memtest86+, HDD scan, and other things. Also try a new PSU.

If it really is a hardware problem get:
P35-DS3L
E2180 if on budget or Q6600/Q9300 if budget is not really an issue.
April 3, 2008 11:24:24 PM

I know for me, that every year or so after countless hours of "fixs" and tinkering with my machine, windows just craps out.

You may just need a clean install to get rid of that not so fresh feeling your PC is having.

April 3, 2008 11:59:56 PM

If you have a dud machine then upgrade. The problem for you though is that from a 6000+ regardless of the "Benchmarks" you are going to see little real world improvement.

I upgraded from an early 3800 X2 this week ...... to an E3110 running at 4 Ghz. Before the upgrade I ran some real time benchmarks on applications that I use which are not Video Encoding. The new machine overall does things in about 40 % of the time - something that took previously 9 Mins 7 Seconds dropped to 3 mins 30 seconds for example. Your current machine already probably does the same thing ~ 5 1/2 to 6 minutes or better already.

As for things like MS Word and so on, they were already "Instant Load" on the 3800 so faster "Instant" makes no difference and that was only a 512 x 2 cache processor and the earliest stepping.

Since running the tests I have dropped the E3110 down a notch to 3780 Ghz to be able to reduce the voltage to VCore 1.248 Volts and turn the fan down to very quiet. If I were upgrading again then I would do the same again. A P5K-E motherboard or similar, 9700 or similar cooler, good case and E3110. About as fast as you can get for single treaded applications which is mostly what I use with the ability to drop in a higher spec Q9XXX chip in a year when they are faster and cheaper and I have a need.
April 4, 2008 12:03:39 AM

If you were a true computer geek you would fix what you have.
April 4, 2008 12:41:27 AM

caamsa said:
If you were a true computer geek you would fix what you have.


ROFL, or go nuts trying.
April 4, 2008 1:00:56 AM

zenmaster said:
Maybe it booted or maybe it's Photoshop.
When a poster refuses to provide something as simple as CPU-Z validation, you have to wonder.


Check out this photoshop: (I wonder how he fooled them?)

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=339861

But apparently he is benchmarking and testing at 3.2 at the moment.

EDIT: Actually it sounds like he's running at 3.2 because "that's easy" and it's 2:30am his time. He feels confident he'll get 3.5 when he has time to tweak it. (So who knows.)


Quote:

I like AMD and even i think thats fake...3.5 when no-one else has reported above 2.9 stable? I do wish people wouldn't spread crap on the net, its one of the worst forms of keyboard warriorism. Why lie? its not as powerful but its cheaper....i'd love a nissan GT-R but i'll settle for a mondeo diesel since work pays me by the mile ;) 

Carod


Yepper. Of course for some people having it turn out to not be fake would be worse.
April 4, 2008 1:40:51 AM

keithlm said:
Check out this photoshop: (I wonder how he fooled them?)

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=339861

But apparently he is benchmarking and testing at 3.2 at the moment.

EDIT: Actually it sounds like he's running at 3.2 because "that's easy" and it's 2:30am his time. He feels confident he'll get 3.5 when he has time to tweak it. (So who knows.)


Quote:

I like AMD and even i think thats fake...3.5 when no-one else has reported above 2.9 stable? I do wish people wouldn't spread crap on the net, its one of the worst forms of keyboard warriorism. Why lie? its not as powerful but its cheaper....i'd love a nissan GT-R but i'll settle for a mondeo diesel since work pays me by the mile ;) 

Carod


Yepper. Of course for some people having it turn out to not be fake would be worse.



That adds some credentials and makes it slightly more believable.
But it does not guarentee he hit those speeds at the voltages shown.
He clearly has the cooling hardware to get it to run at those speeds if he cranks the voltage high enough.

In general, Until results are reproducable by multiple trustworthy resources it does not mean too much.
April 4, 2008 9:01:43 AM

TechnologyCoordinator said:
I don't think that's really been proven at all. Until I see some solid reviews of B3's making into 3ghz land I wouldn't advertise that it will or may.


I did specify some good cooling would be needed, xbit (i think) got to 2.8ghz, but then I believe they were using something resembling a stock heatsink. Something like a zalman 9700 or better, or much better a water block, and a voltage bump should make it to 3ghz stable.
April 4, 2008 9:08:47 AM

TechnologyCoordinator said:
ROFL, or go nuts trying.


Ye - pretty much exactly whats going on at the moment. Im just tired of tearing my hair out really.
The thing about fixing this issue is ( and i have admittedly fixed some pretty crazy things even since the days of the old 286s and XTs ) is that it is just not a consistently replicable fault. So its hard to determine where the real issue is, or if its a combination of issues such as wierd hardware conflicts. If that is the case then its probably never going to get solved.

And trust me - I HATE GETTING BEATEN BY THESE KINDS OF PROBLEMS!!! Its the kind of thing that keeps me up all night tinkering and stays just on the edge of my mind all day. Knowing, deep down that this PC has come out on top and is laughing at me everytime it crashes on me. Whew - crazy rant there...

So yes - would be great if you offered some constructive critisism when you post, instead of teaming up with my PC ;) 

I have Vista 64 Ulti/XP Pro dual boot and it happens in both OS's. Which is why im not trying a reinstall, again.

Still trying to work out why it is locking just before it does the visual ram count. Has to be the ram in that case right?

I have an antec spotcooling fan aimed at my gpu and ram slots which is really kicking down at high but still nothing. I fail to see how it can be heat when im running so decently cold in my case.

I ordered some OCZ Reaper 6400 to test if its actually my 8500 OCZ ram is giving the Crosshair issues. Last night i took out 2 dimms and completely dropped my ram to 667 as apposed to the previous 1066 and 800 ive been trying before. Ive probably tried a couple hundred combinations and suggestions in terms of voltages and adjustments in the bios in order to resolve this. Besides - i didnt by expensive OCZ 1066 ram to run it at 533. Asus said that the Crosshair would support 1066 and was OCZ compatible so i bought it based on this - only to find that i needed to wait 6 months for a NON-stable beta bios ( 0905 ) to be able to using it at native. I have tried every bios release since 0702 when i got my board. Some of the "Approved" bios released straight from the Asus website were so faulty and broken that you would think they had little computer illiterate mongals coding as apposed to actual verfied core programmers. Its things like that and Asus's complete lack of proper support for their products and terrible customer service that makes me want to pull away from Asus products - and ive been using them for ages so its not an unreasonable conclusion.

I have posted on a couple sites for some insight into this issue - ASusTek, Overclockers, OCZ, Toms and a couple others that i cant remember cause the users are crap and just start flaming each other etc, or going off topic on rants.

Anyway ran fine all of last night while jamming Sins of a Solar Empire for several hours. I booted up this morning and was in the middle of converting a movie for my ipod and it just rebooted. After that it wouldnt post. So i switched it off and left for work - once again a beaten, irate PC enthusiast :lol: 

Damn these amazingly great PCs!!
April 4, 2008 9:30:28 AM

it wouldn't suprise me if it was the M/B
April 4, 2008 9:41:55 AM

jimmysmitty said:
From what has been shown and what Intel has given spec wise, Nehalem looks very promising and worth the wait.

They showed a 3.2GHz Nehalem quad core with their new HT called SMT(simultanious multithreading) for a total of 8 cores.

There is a post on this forum with a link to a video showing it doing particle physics for a game.

Wait for Nehalem. Or if you get antsy get a Q6600 :p 


What's his board? If it's an AM2+ that has a bios for Phenom (like ASUS') then a 9850 BE might be viable. 2.8 without changing the voltage isn't that bad for a quad core. Still, I'd stick with what he has instead of going Intel right now, especially a Q6600.

Fact, Nehalem will need a new board. What's the value of a build that will last 9 months? Q6600 is a dead end. So is a Penryn for all that it matters, and throw in a Wolfie too. By staying with what he has, or upgrading to a 9850 BE if his motherboard has a bios for it, he can then decide between Nehalem or Deneb when they both arrive. Either way, he'll need a new motherboard and RAM down the line. So why spend the money now?

spoonboy said:
mmm ...do you care to elaborate on the ASUS point? I like mine, but then again the onboard sound made crackling noises (real ones not tiny squeaks) and the onboard wifi was abysmal ...but apart from that it's perfect lol.


That's strange, my wife's ASUS 690G has been going strong since September 2007 and I just upgraded my son's old P4/ASUS X200 board with an ASUS 780G. I was thinking of going ASUS 780G for Phenom, but I might just wait for Deneb. I've had more problems with MSI boards, even though they're good about replacing them.

I had an Nvidia 405 board die a month after the February 2007 build, then I moved the CPU to a spare MSI 405 board from a Fry's bundle and got the dead one replaced. I gave that one away and upgraded to the MSI 690V to have no conflicts with the 3870x2, so the Nvidia 405's in the closet.

Most people say ECS is worst, MSI a bit better and then Gigabyte and ASUS are the best, but I guess it depends upon experience. My experience is that if it's bundled with a CPU at Fry's, then it's not the best board around. I've seen mostly ECS but some MSI and (once) with a Phenom 9600, an ASUS 690G but that's probably because that board was one of the few with a bios at the time that could support Phenom.

snarfies1 said:
I haven't seen any kind of reviews, but I know for a long time the 590a was considered the best AM2 chipset. Since 780a will be AM2+, it'll let you get a little more out of a Phenom. On paper, anyhow... we'll see what the reviews say.


I have my doubts about Nvidia chipsets. The best ones for Phenom seem to be AMD's own ATI derived 780G, 770 and 790. The only thing high end Nvidia chipsets are good for is SLI.

dannyboy27, what's with the beta in your board name? I'm not familiar with that model. I guess you got some bad luck if it's the third one you tried. Has anyone mentioned power supply? Rebooting sometimes happens with those issues, though BSOD are usually OS related.

What I'd do is full diagnostics, memtest, surface scan on all drives, repair on the OS, rollback drivers if need be. I hate issues like that too, but haven't encountered anything that bad since I was given a free K5 and motherboard that did fine for a guy under Linux but wouldn't boot Windows 98 at all. Maybe you do need a new motherboard that's not simply a warranty replacement for the one you've got.
April 4, 2008 10:08:54 AM

keithlm said:
Here's a thread I'm watching to see what kind of speed is possible:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=183025

3.5Ghz. (Although not verified, validated or tested for stability. But it booted. That's a start.)


Nice find. Checking that thread out, theres a few people saying they made it to 3ghz.

"i currently tested now one B3 - and a few other guys here also, all of them are able to do 3Ghz stable with a small voltage bump (except my one under Vista64bit with SP1 there my one need higher voltages to be stable)

from what i read and heared, i think they all are able to do 3Ghz."

I dont know if the op on this thread edited his first post or something, but there are screenies of cpu-z and everest up there, so it looks ok.
April 4, 2008 10:48:59 AM

@ yipsl

The mobo is an Asus Crosshair - revision 2 i believe. The current bios i am using is 0905 which is the latest one and is a beta. Asus are just crap at bios updates and havent released another one for a few months now so im stuck with it. Im getting the feeling that Asus know that the Crosshair is an overhyped and faulty board with MASSIVE holes in it. Make no mistake, the bios options are literally limitless and it was built for overclocking.

Its an expensive board and was top of the line for ages. Judging by the cold shoulder im getting from Asus customer support Im being led to believe that they are washing their hands of the Crosshair and moving on. If you browse around on the web for problems with posting and ram conflicts etc about the board you will be unindated with similar issues.

Just a shoddy make of board. My good mate has returned his 4 times as well as buying 2 more from seperate quality outlets - he really likes the board; but that cant be a coincidence. But in all fairness my flatmate whose PC i built worked first time and hasnt given any problems. He has a Crosshair board to and the only difference with his system is the ram is OCZ 6400 as apposed to my OCZ 8500.

Maybe you are right and i need to get like an M2N32 which appears quite stable. I just feel like im throwing cash away. I have a spare Gigabyte 790 board sitting at home but i really want to test other aspects before i completely go through the mission of swopping out all of my components to another board...
April 4, 2008 11:59:21 AM

to tell you the truth if you want AMD and you find your problem I would wait for the 45nm Phenom's to hit the market in Jul-Aug. B3 still dose not overclock well. I'm sticking with mine till 45nm is out.
a c 127 à CPUs
April 4, 2008 2:25:18 PM

yipsl, are you saying that no matter what that a Q6600 is a dead end? Some people, like myself, do a completely new build every 2-3 years. I went 5 cuz I didn't have the money. And a Q6600 is not a dead end really as a quad core has yet to be fully utilized at all.

spoonboy said:
Nice find. Checking that thread out, theres a few people saying they made it to 3ghz.

"i currently tested now one B3 - and a few other guys here also, all of them are able to do 3Ghz stable with a small voltage bump (except my one under Vista64bit with SP1 there my one need higher voltages to be stable)

from what i read and heared, i think they all are able to do 3Ghz."

I dont know if the op on this thread edited his first post or something, but there are screenies of cpu-z and everest up there, so it looks ok.


Not bad. But still who is to say that everyone will get it. I will reserve judgement until they hit our shelves. I was also woundering why some of the tech sites could ounly hit 2.7GHz, others 2.8GHz and some 3GHz but all with a much higher voltage than I could ever do.
April 4, 2008 2:33:23 PM

number 13 said:
it wouldn't suprise me if it was the M/B




it wouldn't suprise me if it was the operator. :lol: 
April 4, 2008 4:42:30 PM

@ Caamsa

Did you not get enough sugar this morning - or was it the lack of attention you recieved as a child?

Its basically like you posting a question to decent users on a forum and me replying with "blah blah blah random 'witty' flame blah blah your mom". Just not valuable or helpful at all.

So, if you have nothing of value to say, not even to comment on the off topic about the 3.5ghz phenom, then please for the love of god post elsewhere.
April 4, 2008 5:14:04 PM

DannyBoy27 said:
@ Caamsa

Did you not get enough sugar this morning - or was it the lack of attention you recieved as a child?

Its basically like you posting a question to decent users on a forum and me replying with "blah blah blah random 'witty' flame blah blah your mom". Just not valuable or helpful at all.

So, if you have nothing of value to say, not even to comment on the off topic about the 3.5ghz phenom, then please for the love of god post elsewhere.



He's just upset because you're having a problem with a system based on his favorite company, so he wants to blame you.

If it was an Intel system he'd be blaming Intel for making crappy parts and then go on about how Intel execs eat aborted fetuses.
April 4, 2008 5:28:47 PM

TechnologyCoordinator said:
Intel execs eat aborted fetuses.

I **** KNEW it!!!




;) 
April 4, 2008 5:34:54 PM

LukeBird said:
I **** KNEW it!!!




;) 


lol, I had some other ones, but they weren't forum appropriate!
!