- This topic has 43 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 18 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Thanks to Nickname, Kalia went ahead and ordered our new builds. Here’s the specs:
#
* 2 x Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Yorkfield 2.66GHz LGA 775 95W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80569Q9450 – Retail
* 2 x CORSAIR CMPSU-1000HX 1000W ATX12V 2.2 / EPS12V 2.91 Power Supply – Retail
* 1 x Logitech G15 2-Tone USB Wired Standard Gaming Keyboard – Retail
* 1 x Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case – Retail
* 1 x CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X2048-6400C4 – Retail
* 2 x EVGA 01G-P3-N891-AR GeForce 9800 GX2 1GB (512MB per GPU) 512-bit (256-bit per GPU) GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card – Retail
* 2 x XFX MB-N780-ISH9 LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 780i SLI Intel Motherboard – Retail
* 1 x CORSAIR XMS2 DHX 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X4096-6400C4DHX – Retail
There are two of most stuff because we are building one for each of us.
yousillyGoose said:
wow, that’s a lot of money to drop on a card
Once I get the rebate in for it I will have paid ~ $265
Poopie said:
a little bit much?At the time it was the fastest on the market. I bought it right when the 8800 Ultras were starting to come on the market. Keep in mind this was before the 8800GT and G92 8800GTS.
It’s done well so far and has been worth the price in performance compared to the cheaper alternatives when I was designing this build.
I agree; I spent about $430 on my G80 8800GTS 640MB that I still use now (apparently compusa went on backorder
) and honeslty its one of the best and longest-lasting investments I have made for my computer. I bought that card about 20 months ago and it still can play most every game at high settings.Computer is up and stable at 3.2ghz per core. 5.7 windows rating (RAM was lowest score). Might have to bump the memory speeds up a bit.
Kuros said:
Computer is up and stable at 3.2ghz per core. 5.7 windows rating (RAM was lowest score). Might have to bump the memory speeds up a bit.Good luck with the ram. I can’t get it above like 5.3 no matter what the timings or speed is set to. I got mine up to 900MHz and lowered the timings to 3-3-3-9 but still same score. If you look up the Vista test for the memory part you can run just that test from command prompt and see what your transfer speed is. The problem is that Windows measures it alot lower than other programs like Everest which I place more faith in to be accurate.
MasterP said:
Good luck with the ram. I can’t get it above like 5.3 no matter what the timings or speed is set to. I got mine up to 900MHz and lowered the timings to 3-3-3-9 but still same score. If you look up the Vista test for the memory part you can run just that test from command prompt and see what your transfer speed is. The problem is that Windows measures it alot lower than other programs like Everest which I place more faith in to be accurate.my ram comes up as a 5.9…
Funny thing is that this ram came up as a 5.9 on the Windows Index when it was UNDERCLOCKED!!! Maybe it’s AMDs better memory management, I don’t know. Intel has always been more for bandwidth than low latency, so I’m figuring that would bump that score up. Honestly I’m not that worried about it, 5.7 is still hella good.
Mine is still coming up as a 5.9 underclocked to 667mhz speeds, 4-4-4-15 2T. I think it has to do with the nforce chipset as MasterP has the 680i; mine is Intel P965.
Mine is up to 5.8 now, I’ve found the culprit. When I get bored again I’ll bring it up to 5.9. My tRC timing was too high. It was having trouble accessing RAM from one stick to another.
Everything on my box is running at stock speeds except the FSB on the ram which is up from 800 mhz to 1066.
Kuros said:
Mine is up to 5.8 now, I’ve found the culprit. When I get bored again I’ll bring it up to 5.9. My tRC timing was too high. It was having trouble accessing RAM from one stick to another.What are your full settings? (include the non-standard values if you can)
Here’s the final solution:
Pic 1 shows the Windows Index, Pic 2 shows the final solution with the RAM and Pic 3 shows the stable overclock with the 1600Mhz fsb.
Well this was the best I could do; I am going to try and crawl my fsb up a little more and see if I can get that 5.9 but the PC absolutely will not boot at fsb 400; its at 380 now. Still a nice 1ghz overclock ftw.
Turn off speed stepping and use the lower multiplier and you maybe be able to get that last little bit of frequency.
nope, 380 was it; 385 would post but not stable to boot into windows. Keep in mind my motherboard is only officially rated up to 1066 fsb anyways.
Still, not bad for a 2 year old cpu. I still fail, but only a little (like .1 points)
EDIT: I didn’t realize I actually achieved a higher frequency than you
though I guess yours is a 1333fsb cpu and mine is “only” a 1066fsbI matched your clocks and was still only getting 5.3 in Vista. I think it’s the chipset but if/when I get some of those Dominator sticks I’ll find out for sure.
Nickname said:
nope, 380 was it; 385 would post but not stable to boot into windows. Keep in mind my motherboard is only officially rated up to 1066 fsb anyways.Still, not bad for a 2 year old cpu. I still fail, but only a little (like .1 points)
EDIT: I didn’t realize I actually achieved a higher frequency than you
though I guess yours is a 1333fsb cpu and mine is “only” a 1066fsbI wasn’t going for maximum frequency, it’s running right where I want it to. Props on your overclock though. It just proves how versatile those Core 2 Duos are.
Kuros is just mad because my ram scored 5.9 without ocing it.
props to him tho for getting his computer a perfect score
.
- The forum ‘PC Hardware Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.