upgrade E6300 to Q6600 or Q6700 power consumption Q

[seanoz]

I have a Gigabyte 965p-S3 Rev 1.0 board, and as far as I can tell the best bang for buck upgrade from my E6300 1.8 CPU is to either a Q6600 or Q6700.

But I have a fully complemented USB bus, all 8 ports conected, 3 external HDDs, 2 on USB, and one on Firewire, a TV Tuner a printer etc. a card reader, (there are 2 small hubs running only low drain devices), and all my PCI slots filled. 2 LG DVD drives, 5 SATA internal drives and a floppy. Other USb items are my phone dock, my PSP, my camera and an IR device, all of which are interchanged.

I have an ATI x1650 and I run 2 21" Dell Trinitrons (not that I think they have any influence). A creative Audigy Platinum Pro, that runs a power cable on the board for the external I/O box..

I am really concerned about the USB power demands after inserting this higher consumption CPU.

I have an ANTEC quality 500W supply.

The system has been stable for more than a year, with 24/7 operation, the only falls I have had are BSOD from more than 2 flash drives, (some FAT error with XP), and some times the USB system will have the devices disconnect and reconnect after a change, but nothing serious, or strange, maybe a few instances that required a reboot, but very rare.

I am yet to update to SP3, I will at months end.

Any ideas on how this might go power wise putting a Q6600 or Q6700 in?

Sean.

 

[Andrius]

USB has 5V and a current limit of about 500mA per device (550mA if you go for max tolerance). That means 10 USB ports consume a max of about 25-30W worst case. So that shouldn't worry you. 5x15W HDD and 2x25W ODD puts you at around 125W max for all your drives.

E6300 is a 65W and Q6600 is a 95W TDP processor (if you overclock it to say 3.6 that's around 150W max power draw).

USB : 30W
HDD + ODD : 125W
CPU : 150W
MB : 40W
GPU : 75W (max draw for PCIE graphics)
PCI cards : 30W
=====
Total : ~450W

There should be no issues however your PSU is a bit slim.
If you decide to go for a graphics card (one that needs the extra PCIE power plug) upgrade you will likely need to upgrade the PSU as well.
Overclocking might also be limited.

 

[seanoz]

USB has 5V and a current limit of about 500mA per device (550mA if you go for max tolerance). That means 10 USB ports consume a max of about 25-30W worst case. So that shouldn't worry you. 5x15W HDD and 2x25W ODD puts you at around 125W max for all your drives.

E6300 is a 65W and Q6600 is a 95W TDP processor (if you overclock it to say 3.6 that's around 150W max power draw).

USB : 30W
HDD + ODD : 125W
CPU : 150W
MB : 40W
GPU : 75W (max draw for PCIE graphics)
PCI cards : 30W
=====
Total : ~450W

There should be no issues however your PSU is a bit slim.
If you decide to go for a graphics card (one that needs the extra PCIE power plug) upgrade you will likely need to upgrade the PSU as well.
Overclocking might also be limited.

Thanks Andrius,

What is "TDP" processor?

I am not into overclocking, I do well enough with the standard configs, but I see your point on it being slim, maybe a 750W will be more appropriate? I don't see any need to upgrade the GPU, although if it fails then I will need to buy a more recent model which might force a PSU upgrade.

Also, does this config mean it is more important to cool the NB chip due to such a load on all MB functions? I have an ANtec P180 case, that keeps my drives and my system cool and has very low dust, but I hear for longevity they need an extra fan?

Thanks for a very detailed reply.

Sean.

 

[Andrius]

TDP is a way to measure/estimate maximum power draw of a component.
http://processorfinder.intel.com/PopUpHelp.aspx?label=ThermalGuideline
Q6700 95W (if you won't overclock I think it is worth the extra money):
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLACQ
Q6600 95W :
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLACR
E6300 : 65W :
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL9SA

If you won't overclock there's no need to upgrade the PSU (I'm not sure how good the Antec is and how accurately it's rated). 80% peak load on the PSU is quite a reasonable value.

Cooling the motherboard and components is always a good idea however it might be difficult since your computer is fully loaded. Look into a Zalman FB-123 bracket if you can get your hands on one (they are hard to get where I live). The Antec P180 is an excellent case. Check the temperatures to see if you need additional cooling (I think 40°C for a northbridge is a good temperature).

 

[seanoz]

TDP is a way to measure/estimate maximum power draw of a component.

Got it, thanks.

If you won't overclock there's no need to upgrade the PSU (I'm not sure how good the Antec is and how accurately it's rated). 80% peak load on the PSU is quite a reasonable value.

I was sure to buy a quality PSU when I got this, and studied many at the time, it has lasted well over 3 years, and this system is BEDROCK stable.

Cooling the motherboard and components is always a good idea however it might be difficult since your computer is fully loaded.

Do you mean electronically or physically? Cause I was considering a small plate fan that can be stuck onto the heatsink, they aree only about an inch in diameter.

Look into a Zalman FB-123 bracket if you can get your hands on one (they are hard to get where I live).

I will take a look.

The Antec P180 is an excellent case. Check the temperatures to see if you need additional cooling (I think 40°C for a northbridge is a good temperature).

Yes, the case is a dream, it is so quite and easy to work on. The mountings are very stable and have meant much less wear and tear on the drives.

I will look to the temp, but even on 35+ days here, I still only get about 44 to 45 on HDDs and mostly they are from 35-40 (as also reported by the drives via HD Tune).

To me, these are very good temps, considering there are 5 drives, 2 system, and three internal that sit below with there own fan that goes over the PSU. I really do not expect anything over 40 where the board sits, but I will have to take a look. AFAIK the CPu's run at about 50.

Sean.

 

[sailer]

USB has 5V and a current limit of about 500mA per device (550mA if you go for max tolerance). That means 10 USB ports consume a max of about 25-30W worst case. So that shouldn't worry you. 5x15W HDD and 2x25W ODD puts you at around 125W max for all your drives.

E6300 is a 65W and Q6600 is a 95W TDP processor (if you overclock it to say 3.6 that's around 150W max power draw).

USB : 30W
HDD + ODD : 125W
CPU : 150W
MB : 40W
GPU : 75W (max draw for PCIE graphics)
PCI cards : 30W
=====
Total : ~450W

There should be no issues however your PSU is a bit slim.
If you decide to go for a graphics card (one that needs the extra PCIE power plug) upgrade you will likely need to upgrade the PSU as well.
Overclocking might also be limited.

Based on this, the present Antec 500wt, though it may have been good enough in past use, would be very slim indeed. A new PSU in the area of 550wts to 650wts would be a good idea, especially since the Antec 500wt PSU is over three years old and the capacitors have aged a bit during that time and new PSUs are generally more efficient than the older ones. One of these Seasonics would probably work well:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151027

for stock CPU clocks, or if you plan to overclock, try this one:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151030

 

[Reynod]

Um there is no need to overclock a Q6600 anyway ... apart from the brag factor ... given what you want the pc for.


You won't get any more FPS on the games because you have a low end graphics card.

On that basis there is no need to upgrade the PSU unless you get a higher end card ... like an 88 or 98 series Nvidia or a 38 series ATI card.

You will get uber gains on applications that will utilise the other cores though ... like encoding etc ... and it will run a lot smoother across all of your applications in general.

If you put a Q in the box make sure you tidy up the wiring and have plenty of airfow inside the case ... to keep it cool.

 

[sailer]

Um there is no need to overclock a Q6600 anyway ... apart from the brag factor ... given what you want the pc for.

So many people on the forums do overclock, I try to give that in consideration when recommending parts such as PSUs. Except for a very few games, I find there is little reason for clocks much higher than 3ghz, but as you say, there is the "brag factor" that many people go for.

If not overclocking and the extra money isn't a problem, I would recommend the Q6700 over the Q6600, as the higher multiplier gives a worthwhile increase in speed. Even those who overclock can find the higher multiplier advantageous.

 

[jsc]

Running stock frequencies, your load will go up 30 watts, all on the 12 volt rails.

As a matter of fact, in an EP35-DS3P, a Q6600 OC'd to 3.6 GHz pulls about 9.5 amps ( < 120 watts) while running Prime95.

You could save a little money (put it toward a more powerful PSU) by buying a Q6600 instead of a Q6700 and doing a moderate OC to 2.7 GHz or 3.0 GHz. A G0 Q6600 [strike]will[/strike] should run that fast on the stock voltage which means the stock HSF will be more than adequate.

 

[Andrius]

@Sailer and seanoz
The 3 years old makes a bit of a difference. I agree with sailer on this however I doubt it will be an issue as I've taken everything to the theoretical maximum values (even for a heavily overclocked quadcore).
Investing in a quality PSU is indeed a good idea (I change mine every 3-4 years anyway).

@jsc
I agree on the cooling, but since he said he's not interested in overclocking I think the Q6700 is worth the extra money. If he were to overclock a Q6600 and a good cooler would be the best value.

I overclocked my Q6600 to 3.0GHz for a very simple reason. It's what the P35 board runs at stock and my Q6600 runs 3.0GHz below CPU stock voltage. The "brag factor" is irrelevant for me as this a workhorse build and 100% stability is more important than cutting edge performance.

 

[Reynod]

No insult intended ... it just seemed a waste when hooked up to a low end graphics card ... and a power supply close to the edge ... on an old board.

See my point here?

The difference between in performance for the Q66 vs the Q67 given the above is just wasting more money for no reason I think too.

 

[Andrius]

^I never thought about that. Good thinking. The difference in performance will likely be very small yes. The Q67 might run a bit cooler (since it requires 95W at 2.67GHz vs the Q66s 2.4GHz) but that's about as relevant as the speed increase.

 

[modtech]

That's not right. Just because they share the same TDP doesn't make the Q6600 more power hungry or hotter. In fact it's quite the opposite. Due to the high demand for Q6600, often parts that could be binned for higher clocks are down clocked and sold as Q6600s. Anyway TDP is a sort of worst case scenario rating and the method that Intel uses differs from AMD's (I'm not talking about ACP here).

 

[Andrius]

@Modtech
You are right about the binning (it's a lottery), but since they are both rated at 95W for stock speed and Q6700 gets it's speed reduced more than the Q6600 by idling I'd say the Q6700 should in general be cooler at idle (the difference would be small if there's any at all). But like I said. The difference should be irrelevant and I like the higher multiplier.

 

[seanoz]

Based on this, the present Antec 500wt, though it may have been good enough in past use, would be very slim indeed. A new PSU in the area of 550wts to 650wts would be a good idea, especially since the Antec 500wt PSU is over three years old and the capacitors have aged a bit during that time and new PSUs are generally more efficient than the older ones. One of these Seasonics would probably work well:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151027

for stock CPU clocks, or if you plan to overclock, try this one:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151030

Thanks sailer.

The issue of the PSU quality I think is a very valid one, based on all your responses, so to be sure, I opened my case and took another look, doubting if I was recalling correctly it's specs.

It is actually a 550W, it is an Antec "True 550" the rails sound pretty good,

+5V 40A
+12 24A
+3.3 32A
-5 0.5A
-12 1.0A
+5SB 2.0A

I will not be overclocking, as games are a minor consideration, I rarely play any on this rig, (preferring my PS3)

But as mentioned by reynod, I do alot of 2D and Video editing, and Vegas can utilise the multi threading, while some of my other design software can be helped alot in the multitasking boost the Quad will give, (I am a chronic opener, I have software running all the time, and need to with copy paste etc.). That is why I went with the x1650, it is rock solid stable and great for 2D and video, it may not be a high speed FPS card, but that is not of concern to me.

The system really is pretty good for me now, even with the E6300, but I really need to find a way to get my HDDs sorted too.

For those HDD experts, please check my other thread http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/245855-32-altering-supported-active-sata-modes.
if you can help me sort my SATA issue.

I forgot to mention I have 4gig of the Corsair CM2X DDR2 ram in 4x1gig sims.

I would recommend the Q6700 over the Q6600, as the higher multiplier gives a worthwhile increase in speed.

That was exactly what I was thinking, for the extra $40-$50 I think I can do well with the difference, yet reynod and Andrius both feel it is inconsequential, I think it is still a better way to go for the overall result, all agree?

And finally, I will look at the Seasonics when getting a new PSU. The other brand I am told is good is Silverstone, which I have in my other 965p-S3 rig. (with getting this Quad, I will swap out my P4 2.13 and give it to my 945 which has a Celeron which I will bin)

I know getting the cooling right is critical, and in my P180 case I have the wiring pretty clean, check out an image of the internal arrangement here:
www.seanoz.net/page8.html
But the overall system temps seem very low.

So I think I am safer to have the Q6700 as you say, it has no more temp issues while it has the slightly better speed.

Sean.

 

[seanoz]

Here is a pertinent question.

My other rig which also has a 965P-S3 has my P4 2.13 HT and an Antec 500W, (that is where I was confused as to my PSU rating) is the Revision 3.3 board.

My main rig, (the one I am planning to put the Quad into) - is a Revision 1.0.

While they both claim support for the Kensington chips, the 3.3 is said to support the power better - BUT ONLY IN REGARDS TO THE 965P-DS3.

Anyone think I should swap out the 3.3 to the 1.0?

I know the Kensington is supported in a non beta BIOS version for both the Rev. 1.0 and the Rev. 3.3, but I don't know how much this will be an issue, should I do the musical chairs?

Here is the BIOS revisions for the Ver 1.0:
http://www.gigabyte.com.au/Support/Motherboard/BIOS_Model.aspx?ProductID=2321
And here the 3.3:
http://www.gigabyte.com.au/Support/Motherboard/BIOS_Model.aspx?ProductID=2457

What I cannot understand is the difference between an 965P-S3 and a 965P-DS3, it is in the DS3 boards where Gigabyte claim the later revisions are better at supporting the Quad processor in regards to power.

Here are the details in the FAQ for the 3.3 where they point out the difference for the Quad:
http://www.gigabyte.com.au/Support/Motherboard/FAQ_Model.aspx?FAQID=5064&ProductID=2314&ClassValue=

Anyone know if I am up for issues putting the Quad in my Rev 1.0 S3? And if so if I should use my Rev 3.3 or just stick with my Rev 1.0 - I cannot see the issue based on the faq not stating anything regarding the Quad power consumption with the S3 (non D)boards.?

Swapping boards is a big job for me and my setup, but if it MUST be done it MUST be done!


Sean.

 

[Andrius]

I think the "D" stands for UltraDurable (solid capacitors, improved chokes and the like so durability and power efficiency improvements).

Both of the boards you linked are advertised as "quad core ready" so I don't think there's a major difference. If you see a bennefit aside from the better power regulation I would swap the newer board to the new chip. If not I couldn't be bothered as they look much the same (at a quick glance) from a feature point of view.

EDIT : From what I see they even use the same BIOS (F10 for Q6700 support) so I guess they are the same featurewise. If you are going to unmount the boards for any reason swap them if not I wouldn't bother. The only difference I see is 333MHz FSB support for the revision 3.3 and you won't need that on a Q6700 anyway.

 

[modtech]

That's correct. Ultra Durable boards overclock better and more reliably and are generally more resistant to abuse. I've used a lot of gigabyte boards (Mostly P31 and P35) to build budget overclockable rigs. The P31 (DS3L) is an absolute dream for the price and it's performance is up there with the more expensive P35 boards.

 

[seanoz]

Thanks guys,

This thread is done.

I can't wait to apply the Quad, I got a backup Rev 1.0 so I will keep the boards as they are.

Sean.

 

[waimanlam]

I was thinking about doing EXACTLY the same thing here.... I have got the same processor but the spec of my PC is slightly different:

Intel Core 2 Duo (Conroe) E6300 1.86Ghz.
Micro-star MS-7318
2gb Samsung DDR2 677Mhz RAM
Seagate SATA II 320gb HDD
Hybrid (Digital+Analog) TV Tuner + Radio
nVidia Geforce 7650GS w/ HDMI, DVI, VGA, S-Video, Composite, Component + Scart.
Sony DVD+RW DL w/ Lightscribe + Sony DVD-Rom
Wireless LAN 802.11g

I don't know much about PC hardware, but is it still safe to go to Q6700?
Thanks.

 

[seanoz]

Hi mate,

As long as you check with MSI's (love MSI, very good brand) website and under the boards product page, and it says it is compatible, (make sure BIOS is up to date, then it is the way to go.

I ended up deciding on the Q6600 I could not see the value in the extra $100 considering how much of a jump the 2.4 will be over the 1.83.

Will be installing tonight, let you know how it is.

Sean.

 

[Andrius]

I don't know much about PC hardware, but is it still safe to go to Q6700?
Thanks.

You forgot to post your PSU specification so any advice we can give you is only a guess.
Q6700 needs a maximum of 95W. E6300 needs a maximum of 65W. If you have 450W+ you should be good..

MS 7318 uses a VIA PT890 chipset. I think it doesn't support quadcores.

As long as you check with MSI's (love MSI, very good brand) website and under the boards product page, and it says it is compatible, (make sure BIOS is up to date, then it is the way to go.

I ended up deciding on the Q6600 I could not see the value in the extra $100 considering how much of a jump the 2.4 will be over the 1.83.

Good advice on the motherboard!

The difference in performance is not worth the $100. Everything above the $50 from $220 vs $270 is too much.

 

[waimanlam]

If VIA PT890 does not support Quad Core, how far I can go for processor speed then?
Thanks!

 

[Mousemonkey]

What about the E6850?, on par with an E8400 for most part (sort of).

 

[Andrius]

MSI's cpu support list doesn't list a MS 7318 board.
http://global.msi.com.tw/index.php?func=cpuform

I don't know the exact model of your board, thisone uses the same P4M890 chipset.
http://global.msi.com.tw/index.php?func=prodcpusupport&prod_no=1082&maincat_no=1#menu

But 266MHz/1066MHz(QP) FSB chips appear to be the maximum, so E6700 is the highest clocked.