Welcome to Vista Banter. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to ask questions and reply to others posts, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
|
Hardware and Windows Vista Hardware issues in relation to Windows Vista. (microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices) |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
CPU for a new PC
Thanks for the tip on the price breaks coming, Dustin. I am definitely
looking to upgrade my CPU and motherboard. When I built my current rig to upgrade to Vista, I mistakenly thought an Athlon 2800+ could do the job. If I try to open the Photo Gallery, my CPU gauge pegs out at 100% and _stays_ there. Photo Gallery crawls trying to draw the thumbnails. I tried to upgrade to an Athlon 3200+ but got 22 Blue Screens of Death. Reinstalled my old CPU, begged Vista's forgiveness, and was so happy when everything went back to normal. This was the first Athlon chip I bought, BTW ... have always had Intel motherboards and chips before. No problem going back to Intel _as long as_ I pick a new mobo and chip that is going to work with Vista (g). My problem is not my video card, BTW. It is a Radeon X1300 512MB RAM. Can run videos (and Dream Scene Preview) beautifully. My poor CPU pegs out often if I try to do more than one thing at a time. I have 2GB DDR RAM, so, I am pretty sure it is my 1.6GHz CPU that I need to upgrade (Experience score 3.4). Please let us know if you get any more info as April nears. Thanks ... vanilla "Dustin Harper" wrote in message ... Core2Duo hands down. But, I'm a gamer, so I'd go for the one with the better gaming benchmarks. Other than that, they are almost neck and neck. Both are fast, but the Core2Duo beats the X2 by a decent margin on the things I need (or want) it too. However, when I do upgrade, I'd be replacing the CPU, motherboard, video card and RAM. The X2 would use the same DDR RAM that I already have. But, since I'm still on AGP, and need a whole system replacement anyway, I'd go with the Core2Duo replacement! Coming April 22nd, there are some Intel price breaks coming, and I may be picking up a quad core Intel for under $300. -- Dustin Harper http://www.vistarip.com -- "Jerry Wong" wrote in message ... Which one will you choose? AMD64 or Core2Duo? -- Jerry Wong http://www.geocities.com/jerrywong.geo ¦ý§Ú*Ì·Ó¥LªºÀ³³\¡B ¬ß±æ·s¤Ñ·s¦a¡A¦³¸q©~¦b¨ä¤¤¡C(©¼«á3:13) But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness. (2 Peter 3:13) |
|
|||
CPU for a new PC
Yep. I have a Thermal Take Big Typhon Cooler. BTW, I just bump the
FSB up to 333 MHz. The CPU is running at 3 GHz and the memory is now over-clocked to 833 MHz. I'm still using stock voltages. It's stable so far. The memory passed one run through of memtest 86+. When I first build my computer, it was a lettle flakey when I tried high over-clocks 3+ GHz. It seems that after two months of burn-in it is more stable. Hence, I been slow pushing it more. I ran 2.7 at first, then 2.88 and now 3.0 GHz. George On Mar 20, 2:45 pm, "Dustin Harper" wrote: Are you running that on air cooling? -- Dustin Harper --"George" wrote in message oups.com... The advantage of the E4300 is that it is for an 800MHz FSB and consequently has a high multiplier (9x). This allows the use of less expensive DDR2 800 memory for over-clocking instead more expensive faster memory (e.g. DDR2 1066). Currently, I run my E4300 at 2.88 GHz with 320 MHz FSB. The memory multiplier is set to 2.5 which results in a memory speed of 800 MHz. The smallest memory multiplier is 2x which would allow a 400 MHz FSB and a 3.6 GHz CPU clock without over clocking the memory. George On Mar 20, 11:12 am, "Dustin Harper" wrote: The E6300 is about $15-20 more than the 4300, and just as good as an overclocker. Of course, not many people consider overclocking an option. I consider it art, though (even my wireless router is overclocked!!). -- Dustin Harper --"George" wrote in message roups.com... If you are an over-clocker consider the 1.8 GHz E4300 for under $200. Mine is running stable at 2.8 GHz at stock voltage for over two months. I problably could run it faster. There are reports people running E4300s at 3.6GHz. George On Mar 20, 10:40 am, "Steve Thackery" wrote: Currently it's no contest: Core 2 Duo. The only time to buy an AMD at the moment is if price is very important (e.g. you're an OEM and buying 'em by the thousand). In terms of performance for the money, the Intel is way ahead. Currently the E6600 looks like the 'sweet spot', being in the corner of the curve before the price goes up disproportionately. Thack- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
|
|||
CPU for a new PC
On Mar 24, 1:08 pm, Ashton Crusher wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 09:12:40 -0700, "Dustin Harper" wrote: The E6300 is about $15-20 more than the 4300, and just as good as an overclocker. Of course, not many people consider overclocking an option. I consider it art, though (even my wireless router is overclocked!!). -- Dustin Harper http://www.vistarip.com I've got an E6300. What is involved in overclocking it and how do you know you have gone "too far"? Is it as simple as going into the bios and cranking up the voltage? It's more complicated than that. Also overclocking can damage your computer and shorten it's lifespan. If you don't know what you are doing I strongly advise you to read some articles about it first. Here are some and you can Google some mo http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2903&p=1 http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2802&p=1 BTW, I didn't have to raise my processor voltage in order to overclock it to 3 GHz. In a nut shell to overclock you CPU, you have to raise the FSB speed. You have to have a motherboard and BIOS that lets you do this. Also when you increase the FSB, you'll overclock your memory also unless you compensate by dropping your memory ratio. At higer overclocks you'll need to increse voltages to get your system to be stable. Doing this is risky. An overclock CPU draws more power especially at higer voltages, so your power supply better be up to it. Also a CPU gets hotter when you run it faster. Depending on much you overclock it you may need a better CPU cooler. Here's a link to graphs showing the cooling abillities of various coolers: http://www.anandtech.com/casecooling...spx?i=2943&p=3 Unless you have an understanding about these things, do not overclock. George George |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|