New cpu

[SolidSnake]

I want to upgrade my cpu to one with 3.0 Ghz Dual core. I have a new mobo so no problem there.
Does anyone know if its better to have a lower or higher cache? E.g. is 6 mb of cache better than 4 Mb of cache ?
Also what is the difference between 65 nm Kentsfield and a 45nm Yorkfield, they are both Intel cpu but why the different names?
Thanks for any help guys,
Ren.

[CRASH]

cache is on-board high speed memory in the processor, more can be better. the different names refer to the different architecture of the chip, 45nm,65nm, etc. 45nm is a thinner manufacturing process of the internal, it allows a higher density of transistor making the chip more efficient, more speed, less power.
Make sure your current or a updated bios will support the specific processor your going to use. 3.0G dual core refers to about 6 different versions. Match up your sSpec number and also the PCG number from the processor to your motherboard and bios. Also Dual Core is not the same as a Core 2 Duo.
http://processorfinder.intel.com/Glossary.aspx
http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/cs-016552.htm

If think you may want to overclock, read up on the overclocking forums which version are tolerate overclocking better, you may find a slower (2.8G)rated chip can be pushed way past a faster(3.0G) rated chip.

If you need help, post or PM me.

[SolidSnake]

Thanks for your help, i don't think i will overclock as i will probably blow it up...lol

[Yourself]

Like Crash stated, more cache is usually better.

This discussion can get pretty technical, so we'll stay away from that.

Generally, you want a faster processor (measured in ghz IN THE SAME CLASS OF CHIP) over higher cache, as long as you're not skimping on the cache. 6meg of cache vs. 4 meg of cache is not a big-deal (in the real world), however 6 meg vs. 2 meg or 1 meg can be a big deal (in the real world).

I assume your heaviest CPU needs are related to gaming, not professional graphics, sound, or video editing, correct?

Here are three samples:

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz 4M shared L2 Cache for $189.99 USD (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115028)

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Wolfdale 3.0GHz 6MB L2 Cache for $199.99 USD (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037)

Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 3.16GHz 6MB L2 Cache for $274.99 USD (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115036)

Looking at those three, they are close enough performance-wise (real world) that I personally would not spend the extra money on the E8500 for basic use and heavy gaming.

That leaves the first two...both are the same clock speed (3.0 ghz), but the second has 2 meg more of cache which will help (especially for the $10 difference).

Additionally, the E8400 is a newer architecture than the E6850 - making the E8400 inherently faster than the E6850 (mainly due to fact that the E8400 will do a bit more per clock cycle than the E6850, and it also has a larger and newer instruction set which will eventually allow it to do graphics and video processing faster then the E6850).

But, all three of those are excellent choices.

All three are also excellent choices to overclock.

You did state that you don't want to overclock (famous last words), so assuming you don't try to go over 3.4-3.6 ghz, the stock fans for each of those will be fine.

All three of those are "Retail" packages - that means they come with a heat sink and a factory fan. An "OEM" processor does not come with a fan, so that has to be purchased separately.

Do make sure your motherboard and ram can handle those processors (mainly look at the FSB, or Front Side Bus speed) - all three of those are the same at 1333 FSB. Think of FSB as the speed the processor communicates to the rest of the computer (not technically accurate, but close enough for our purposes). Also make sure your motherboard handles the proper CPU socket - all three of those are LGA 775 (the current Intel spec).

For practically every game out there, none of those processors will be a bottleneck (maybe in huge Supreme Commander maps, or heavy Flight Simulator X use), even mated with a high-end video card.

What are you running as a video card?

And, how much RAM are you running? If not at least 2 gig, I suggest 2 gig.

Yourself (Dave)

[SolidSnake]

Thanks Dave.
I have 2 Gb of Ram, a 7950 GX2 nVidia card and a 775 socket Asus p5nw deluxe sli mobo. The prices of the cpu are very good.
Thanks again for the info, i will check out those cpu's.

[SolidSnake]

Thats a great site David, thanks...

[AladdinSane]

I can attest to the 8400! I love mine! I am running it over-clocked to 3.75 ghz. (3.5 and 4 ghz proved unstable under max loads)

[Yourself]

Yes, those new Intel processors are great chips.

My son has the E6750 (native 2.66 ghz), and it is rock solid stable at 3.2 ghz with stock cooling - even under Super PI, it is well within the heat envelope.

Ren, how much of your machine have you upgraded?

What processor are you running now?

What size monitor are you running (more specifically, what resolution do you game at)?

Since you're already running a 775 socketed motherboard, I am willing to guess that you're already graphics limited with the 7950 GX2, unless you're gaming at lower resolutions (1024 x 768, for example).

If you are running 1920 x 1200 (a 24" LCD) or less, I would suggest upgrading the video card to an 8800GT (NVIDIA), a 9600GT (NVIDIA), an 8800GTS (NVIDIA), or a 3870 (AMD).

Don't get one with less than 512 meg - all of those would be a HUGE upgrade from your 7950 GX2, and you can get all of those for under $200 USD (I saw the 9600GT around $120 USD after mail in rebate on NewEgg - the 9600GT is probably the best buy of those cards). All of those are great cards for less than a 24" LCD, and all of them work well for a 24" LCD.

The 3870 is probably the slowest of those listed (actual gaming, not benchmarking), and is still a major upgrade from your existing card.

My son is running the 3870 on a 24" LCD and it is a stunning picture - he has yet to be disappointed (CoD4, Crysis, World In Conflict, TF2, Hellgate London, and Oblivion are all astounding).

Yourself (Dave)

[SolidSnake]

thanks mate, i like the 9800 GX2 the price is not bad either.

[pyrohunter]

how exactly do you over clock a video card, i dont need to yet but im getting there. I have a 8600 GT with dual core 2.66. and heat isnt a problem considering there are five fans on my case and one of them is a beastly 125mm. so yeah any tips?

[CRASH]

how exactly do you over clock a video card, i dont need to yet but im getting there. I have a 8600 GT with dual core 2.66. and heat isnt a problem considering there are five fans on my case and one of them is a beastly 125mm. so yeah any tips?
Ati offers software to overclock their cards, then you can also check out the card manufacturers forums also. I think its more common to overclock the CPU
Only 125mm fan? why not a 200mm?

[Spam Dinner]

google search for riva tuner.

[CrazyPolock]

I have the intel 6600. With a zallman cooler, and it is running 3.0ghz rock solid my only changing the multiplier. No change in voltage! My room temp is 75f, and my chip temp is 34.6c 94F.
I run an 8800GTS 640meg it was playing at 51c, then I modded the case by cutting an opening in the case cover at the vid card and putting in window screening. This droped the temp to 43c. Added a fan an now it is at 35 - 38c. I average 150 - 180 fps with 2xAA and everything else maxed. Yes I know that is low, but I am running Vista. 5.9 accross the vista test.
With my AMD 4200+manchester I was getting 54-70 fps. Big difference.
Another major change was going with 4 gig of ddr2, then setting the board to match the manufacturers recomended settings.

So what am I saying? save your money, the 6600 is plenty of chip for what you need. Easy to overclock to your goal of 3.0. Put your saved money into the video card and memory. DDR3 is great, but not worth the price yet. Getting 4 GB at low latency than 2 GB at high latency. Just my opinion, I know that over all the DDR3 is faster gig for gig.

Anyone try one of the new memory chip drives for their swap file? I have seen 32GB drives out there, thinking that might be a swap file option?

[SolidSnake]

I have the intel 6600. With a zallman cooler, and it is running 3.0ghz rock solid my only changing the multiplier. No change in voltage! My room temp is 75f, and my chip temp is 34.6c 94F.
I run an 8800GTS 640meg it was playing at 51c, then I modded the case by cutting an opening in the case cover at the vid card and putting in window screening. This droped the temp to 43c. Added a fan an now it is at 35 - 38c. I average 150 - 180 fps with 2xAA and everything else maxed. Yes I know that is low, but I am running Vista. 5.9 accross the vista test.
With my AMD 4200+manchester I was getting 54-70 fps. Big difference.
Another major change was going with 4 gig of ddr2, then setting the board to match the manufacturers recomended settings.

So what am I saying? save your money, the 6600 is plenty of chip for what you need. Easy to overclock to your goal of 3.0. Put your saved money into the video card and memory. DDR3 is great, but not worth the price yet. Getting 4 GB at low latency than 2 GB at high latency. Just my opinion, I know that over all the DDR3 is faster gig for gig.

Anyone try one of the new memory chip drives for their swap file? I have seen 32GB drives out there, thinking that might be a swap file option?

Can you help me overclock my 6600 manually?
What changes do i have to make in the BIOS?

[Yourself]

Keep in mind that not all processors overclock well, however the recent Intel processors have been some of the most successful in history.

Make sure you have a good cooling solution (decent CPU fan) and a good enough power supply.

For research, I find This Anandtech technical forum about processors and overclocking (http://forums.anandtech.com/categories.aspx?catid=28&forumid=1) to be almost invaluable.

It will teach you how to do it, how to monitor it, what the different settings mean, how to know if you're approaching the limit of your chip, etc.

Just search....start by searching that forum for your processor and motherboard.

For starters, you should check to see if your motherboard BIOS is up to date.

Then, make sure all of your drivers are up to date.

Research your ram (timings, etc.) to see what they can handle, and research to see what others have done with your hardware (or similar to your hardware).

Each experience is unique but there are many parallels and examples you can follow.

You may also find out a target spec to shoot for.

It references many utilities to help you...I think there's even some "automated" overclockers - programs that slowly bump up settings in your system until the maximum overclock is reached.

It also teaches you how to isolate different aspects of your system to help in troubleshooting, and determine the maximum overclock for each part of your system.

Learn how to set a switch (or configure a jumper) on your motherboard to re-enable a default system boot in case the system gets to a point that it won't boot.

Heat will be your enemy (that, and extreme voltage if you're not careful).

Be prepared for things to go haywire...and PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A GOOD BACKUP, OR THAT YOU CAN RECOVER YOUR MACHINE (ALWAYS ASSUME THAT AN ATTEMPTED OVERCLOCK CAN TRASH YOUR SYSTEM).

Always check to see if the overclock is worth it (i.e. does it make a real-world difference - do you see a difference in the things you do on your system?).

But, good luck....keep us posted on your progress.

Oh...one last thing....NEVER overclock (or attempt an overclock) a system that you can't do without. Always assume the worst case: that the system will no longer be usable.

Yourself (Dave).

[CrazyPolock]

That last statement was about as true as it gets. If you cannot affort to purchase another chip to replace the one you blew, don't overclock. That being said, with the Bios I have it was easy, I found the multiplier setting for the chip and up'ed it to achieve 3.0ghz. Where did I come up with this "safe" point, I did a lot of reading, and found a majority of the people were adding voltage after adding the multipier and getting 3.2. I do not like to add voltage to a chip as that adds to heat, and I don't need more heat!

Secondly if you notice I stated i have a Zallman cooler, a big honking massive heatsink. Stability of an overclock is only as good as the cooler you have attached to it. Heat is the enemy!

Do you research, and do what you think is best. Overclocking is a balance between Heat, $$$, and Performance.

[SolidSnake]

That last statement was about as true as it gets. If you cannot affort to purchase another chip to replace the one you blew, don't overclock. That being said, with the Bios I have it was easy, I found the multiplier setting for the chip and up'ed it to achieve 3.0ghz. Where did I come up with this "safe" point, I did a lot of reading, and found a majority of the people were adding voltage after adding the multipier and getting 3.2. I do not like to add voltage to a chip as that adds to heat, and I don't need more heat!

Secondly if you notice I stated i have a Zallman cooler, a big honking massive heatsink. Stability of an overclock is only as good as the cooler you have attached to it. Heat is the enemy!

Do you research, and do what you think is best. Overclocking is a balance between Heat, $$$, and Performance.


I have a Pro Freezer 7 cpu cooler which is rated as one of the best in PC Format magazine.
I once overclocked using the software that came with the mobo (in windows, it was running fine at 2.9 Ghz but one day when i booted it disabled both hard drives (in Raid0).

[Yourself]

Be EXTREMELY careful overclocking a machine with any form of RAID in use.

Take great care to NOT overclock the PCI bus - that can cause RAID corruption and lead to all kinds of issues.

I can't remember offhand if disk I/O (and/or RAID controllers) are handled by the Northbridge or Southbridge chipsets, but make sure those stay cool during overclocking....they can heat up rather dramatically, and most systems do not have active cooling for them.

Some aftermarket CPU fans direct moving air over the Northbridge and Southbridge chipsets to help cool, but I'm not familiar with aftermarket fans.

Yourself (Dave)

[Yourself]

Along those lines...

Do you see any real-world benefit from using RAID 0?

I've worked with it in the past, and I never received any real-world benefit...I never noticed anything running that much faster to make it worth using.

My concern has always been data integrity, and I'd be concerned that losing a drive in a RAID 0 configuration renders both drives unusuable.

In my perverted way of thinking, that's twice the probability of having a disk failure.

I've been through tons of disk failures over the years - enough that I'm pretty concerned about it.

Mainly because I'm not the only user of my machines, and my family stands a lot to lose in a catastrophic crash.

Yourself (Dave)

[SolidSnake]

The only reason i have Raid0 is because the book i read when i built my pc suggested it for gaming, i was ignorant about the whole thing so just followed what the book said.