In the middle of building a light/mid gaming system and im not all that savy on the whole "bottlenecking" issue. Basically im in the process of cutting corners off the cost and I need to know how low I can go on the processor before performance is put in a cast.
Are you at all interested in overclocking? the E2200 series can be OC'd to 1066 FSB with a cheap cooler like the Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro extremely easily on any P35/P45 board. Which would provide extremely nice performance for the price, you could even boost it higher if you want (I have my brother's E2180 @3.2Ghz)
Message edited by IndigoMoss on 08-26-2008 at 06:42:43 AM
You should go dual core on the cpu. This is a must if you are planning on making this rig last for any length of time for todays games and a few new releases in the future. A single core cpu will be a bottleneck for any decent gaming card by todays standards.
Go for the best dual core & motherboard combo. What is the specs for the rest of the system this is going in?
If you dont want to go Intel, this is a great overclocking cpu and a decent combo price:
Hmm....your E7200 + Foxcon board sounds like the best option at the moment.
You could go with AMD triple core 8450 for $104 at newegg. I am not too familiar with AMD CPUs though to be able to recommend them. Wouldn't hurt to look at it though.
The E7200 and the Foxconn are without a doubt the best combo, but im being a pennypincher with this one, but nothing else really seems worth it, the E7200 crush AMD offerings for a fraction of the price, plus I can OC the hell out of it.
Well, I see that people are getting the AMD triple core up to 3.0GHz. If you play games that like more than 2 cores that could get you a few more FPS than the E7200. But...I guess if the E7200 can get up to 3.5GHz...it would probably surpass a 3.0GHz AMD CPU.
Interesting to see how an X3 stacks up against the E7200 in UT3
Message edited by SpinachEater on 08-27-2008 at 04:47:06 AM
The E7200 and the Foxconn are without a doubt the best combo, but im being a pennypincher with this one, but nothing else really seems worth it, the E7200 crush AMD offerings for a fraction of the price, plus I can OC the hell out of it.
There are better performing p45 motherboards from more well known brands that also cost less than that Foxconn board.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6813128345 The Foxconn board has rating for 1600mhz fsb and 1066mhz ddr2 as "(o.c.)," or overclocked speed. This is very poor for p45 chipset. The cheaper Gigabyte board has native 1600mhz fsb rating, and native 1200mhz ddr2 rating. Who needs to know how much they think you'll likely be able to overclock the thing? Manufacturer should be able to guarantee the speeds they advertise.
Those triple cores are just too expensive, $104 for for 2.1ghz one, the 2.4ghz 8750 is $175. Im "sure" the 2.1ghz one will bottleneck the 4850.
**EDIT** Hmm, the results for those triple cores arent that bad....wow. I had no clue. The 8750 is right there with the E8400, and you get an extra core for only a few bucks more with the AMD. Even the lowly 8450 isnt bad. I need to dig up some more charts to see what impact the low clock has on GPU performance, also with the 790GX board I should be able to OC it a little more than with the others.
Also thanks for the heads up on the Foxconn dagger.
Message edited by spathotan on 08-27-2008 at 04:51:53 AM
It is actually at the stock 2.1GHz clock surpassing the 2.5GHz E7200...that has some promise if one could indeed get it up to 3.0GHz....that is on a quad core loving game engine though.
Let me be fair and throw up a game that doesn't care about tri or quad cores...the X3 gets hosed
It is a 65nm vs 45nm so production yields / costs are higher for the smaller dies but still...you would think pricing would even out for the 65nm chips.
It is a 65nm vs 45nm so production yields / costs are higher for the smaller dies but still...you would think pricing would even out for the 65nm chips.
They price it at what people are typically willing to pay.
Yea......I think non-oc'ing results are what im leaning towards right now. Im not gonna blow money on an aftermarket cooler and all.
Saving money is what oc is all about. A good aftermarket cooler only cost $30-40. Spend $30 on a cooler to oc a $180 q6600 from 2.4 to 3.6ghz and outperform a stock "extreme" version quad that cost $1500. You save $1290, and get better performance.
Lol, true. However ive never been able to get this Q6600 I have over 3.0ghz stable. This is with 3 different motherboards (3 different chipsets) and 4 different coolers. 1.3VID, temps get too high too early in the OC.
Its a G0. And yea the VID is extremely high, second highest you can get on this I believe hince my crappy OC experience with this piece.
I have the exact same 1.3125vid chip, and it's prime95 stressed stable at 1.45vcore @3.6ghz or 1.65vcore @4ghz, with loadline calibration on. It should do fine.
Well I did turn memory speed on Auto and FSB Strap to NB on Auto in the BIOS, and ive been able to get it to 3.2ghz AAAANND lower the voltage down to 1.267 (or w/e it is ). Its been stressing smallftts in prime for almost an hour now, I went into the BIOS basically right after my last post.
So it had to have been memory or FSB strap that was holding me back, it was set to 333FSB.
Well I did turn memory speed on Auto and FSB Strap to NB on Auto in the BIOS, and ive been able to get it to 3.2ghz AAAANND lower the voltage down to 1.267 (or w/e it is ). Its been stressing smallftts in prime for almost an hour now, I went into the BIOS basically right after my last post.
So it had to have been memory or FSB strap that was holding me back, it was set to 333FSB.
Strange how you can get that low vcore on that high VID chip. Are you sure you used the proper torture test and set it to halt when hitting error?
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.