A 4.1 GHz Dual Core at $130 - Can it be True?

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
lol seems like lots of people need help here =), including myself. I'm trying to find a compatible Asus MB that does not have SLI.
 
can someone find me a mATX motherboard that can do the 20x multiplier for the 805 implementaion for the front -side bus...and will be future proof for conroe 1066 fsb native...down the road?
Click to expand...

agreed...but baseline...i need to find a microATX motherboard that can achieve the multiplier...

my fear is that no one makes a Intel 975X chipset implementaion in a microATX design...?
 
zoglog and jay ...motherboard hereclick But as far as future proof for conroe even the 975 chipset currently is most likely going to need a bios or v mod so your not guaranteed futureproofing
currently there is no 975 matx boards out

also you dont need "SL72H" thats just to show that youll have a better chance to repeat what they did .

gre thats not such a great deal. if your lucky enough to have a frys near you check them out first. not only there ads but go instore to they sometimes have unadvertised deals. If not outpost will have combo deals from time to time
 
zoglog and jay ...motherboard hereclick

also you dont need "SL72H" thats just to show that youll have a better chance to repeat what they did .

gre thats not such a great deal. if your lucky enough to have a frys near you check them out first. not only there ads but go instore to they sometimes have unadvertised deals. If not outpost will have combo deals from time to time
Click to expand...

Cool, that takes a bit off my mind, I hope whatever I can I can get up to 3.8Ghz At least. I'm gonna go with the heatsink they suggested.

I was looking for an ATX motherboard (not mATX) that isn't SLI. I just rreread page 11 of the article and I think I made a mistake. I assumed it had to support some special function but it seemsl any socket 775 motherboard that supports dual core should do. Problem is all the asus Nforce4 chipsets are SLI anyway, ohw ell D:

So far i've been eyeing
http://www.asus.com/products4.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=227&model=558&modelmenu=1
Since it's only around 100 shipped @ ZZF and Asus tends to be reliable.

Also is it really that necessary to get one of the conroe compatible MBs if I don't think i'm gonna upgrade anytime soon?
 
Will see how well ECS works. Frys has had a special 805 and ecs 945p-a for $149. For this price I get the motherboard for about $20. Since I don't intend to attempt above air cooled speeds the ddr2-667 memory limitation may not be a issue. If it doesn't work not a big lose I will spend more for the fan than I did for the motherboard.
 
I bought the pentium D 805 several weeks ago and have it running at 3.6GHz stable with the default cooling fan. I tried to overclock it more but it became completely unstable and could not process any load. I can't change the CPU voltage with the current mobo (ECS RC410L/800-M) and I haven't got enough to get a mobo or water cooling yet. The CPU hasn't gotten extremely hot yet but I want to get water cooling just in case. And I found a decent one for $100 so that helps too :lol: I still new a new mobo that has decent overclocking potential.
 
Yeah.... of course it is the test system.... the entire system.... and that is actually how much it is drawing from the wall, not the amount the system is using if you figure in the 70-80% efficiency. But keep in mind, they are not stressing the video card..... at all.... so it is idling. The only thing they are really stressing is the CPU. So in all reality. That CPU is drawing close to or it is drawing 200W. That is alot in my opinion, but it is cool to have a 4.1 Ghz 100+dollar cpu.

Edit..... nm.... probably are including a 3d stress.... but they don't really specify whether it is a full cpu load or a full system load. IE all componets under load. But regardless, a 7800GTX draws less than 100W, around 80-90W. and 2 hdd, mobo, optical drive..... don't add up to much. 478W total system draw....75% of that is about 358.... lets just say 150W for other compnets..... that leaves us with 208W..... now.... I know this is a rough average..... but damn..... you can't really add to much more to the other componets..... 2 HDDs.... one optical.... video card.... and the mobo....

edit. Also.... the FX-60 TDP is around 100W..... and is probably a little lower than that.... AMD tends to overshoot TDP.... that being said.... my system power consumption with my opteron OC'ed to 2.6-2.7 is with two OC'ed GTX's is lower than that system. My max power draw from the wall is 330W..... no where near 480W...... just a thought.....
Click to expand...

westkurtz, keep this in mind, you don't have to oc it to 4.1 and leave it there. 3.8 runs fairly cool, usually without volt mods, and is plenty fast, without sucking much power. Consider it. :)
 
Actually the 945p is not a bad motherboard much better then the ecs410l. stock volatge will get you to 3.4-3.45ghz stable then bump up the voltage to get 3.63ghz on stock cooling.(providing you have good airflow in the case)(mind you i lapped/polished the hsf and cpu and used As5. fan speed of 2552rpm)
 
I bought the pentium D 805 several weeks ago and have it running at 3.6GHz stable with the default cooling fan. I tried to overclock it more but it became completely unstable and could not process any load. I can't change the CPU voltage with the current mobo (ECS RC410L/800-M) and I haven't got enough to get a mobo or water cooling yet. The CPU hasn't gotten extremely hot yet but I want to get water cooling just in case. And I found a decent one for $100 so that helps too :lol: I still new a new mobo that has decent overclocking potential.
Click to expand...

I would like to see a cpu'z of that or even better a run on 3dmark06 if you have one.
 
I'm sorry I don't have 3Dmark06 but I do have a CPUz of it.
CPUzat3.jpg
 
The Pentium D 805 is a budget CPU, but it puts lots of processors from AMD and Intel to shame. Although it is not based on the latest 65 nm core, this CPU remains stable even when operating at amazing 4.1 GHz. What will this mean for the status quo in the computer industry?
Click to expand...

Realy?
An Optron 144 overclocked ONLY to 2.9Ghz still has a higher P rateing at that speed and uses alot less power...gives off alot less heat.

They sale for as low as $129 boxed with a no-hassle 3 year warrenty as well.

Z
 
The Pentium D 805 is a budget CPU, but it puts lots of processors from AMD and Intel to shame. Although it is not based on the latest 65 nm core, this CPU remains stable even when operating at amazing 4.1 GHz. What will this mean for the status quo in the computer industry?
Click to expand...

Realy?
An Optron 144 overclocked ONLY to 2.9Ghz still has a higher P rateing at that speed and uses alot less power...gives off alot less heat.

They sale for as low as $129 boxed with a no-hassle 3 year warrenty as well.

Z

Yes but thats single core with the 805 you get 2 (agreed that the Opty is faster) dual cores gives a nice user experience :) nothing like running a P2P ap and burning a CD and surfing the web at the same time with out any hicups :)
 
The Pentium D 805 is a budget CPU, but it puts lots of processors from AMD and Intel to shame. Although it is not based on the latest 65 nm core, this CPU remains stable even when operating at amazing 4.1 GHz. What will this mean for the status quo in the computer industry?
Click to expand...

Realy?
An Optron 144 overclocked ONLY to 2.9Ghz still has a higher P rateing at that speed and uses alot less power...gives off alot less heat.

They sale for as low as $129 boxed with a no-hassle 3 year warrenty as well.

Z

Yes but thats single core with the 805 you get 2 (agreed that the Opty is faster) dual cores gives a nice user experience :) nothing like running a P2P ap and burning a CD and surfing the web at the same time with out any hicups :)

Did not know it was a dual core.
That is still an un-godly high amount of power usage tho and nothing that a server company would buy.

Looks like the Optron 165 is it's twin for servers altho it costs a bit more it still uses less enough power to more than pay for it's self in a 3 year life rotation. Shop/center server room A.C. power not even factored into the mix...if so ALOT more savings and I estimate more than enough to pay for all the hardware it is mounted in given the cost of oil for power these days.

Given the new Z-Ram for cashe and other power saving/speed boosting "tricks" I think both Intel and AMD will be hitting 5Ghz+ (as IBM now) but at 1 volt in the next four years.

As far as the average home/office user today and programs that a dual core system is needed...it is a big waste of income to buy a dual core product over a much faster and less power hungry sngl core.
The same for dual gfx cards,the human eye will never notice a few extra fps.

You and I both know that alot of people will still go out and pay top price for things that are "cutting edge" only to wish they waited just six months....so on and so on.

Z
 
The Pentium D 805 is a budget CPU, but it puts lots of processors from AMD and Intel to shame. Although it is not based on the latest 65 nm core, this CPU remains stable even when operating at amazing 4.1 GHz. What will this mean for the status quo in the computer industry?
Click to expand...

Realy?
An Optron 144 overclocked ONLY to 2.9Ghz still has a higher P rateing at that speed and uses alot less power...gives off alot less heat.

They sale for as low as $129 boxed with a no-hassle 3 year warrenty as well.

Z

Yes but thats single core with the 805 you get 2 (agreed that the Opty is faster) dual cores gives a nice user experience :) nothing like running a P2P ap and burning a CD and surfing the web at the same time with out any hicups :)

Did not know it was a dual core.
That is still an un-godly high amount of power usage tho and nothing that a server company would buy.

Looks like the Optron 165 is it's twin for servers altho it costs a bit more it still uses less enough power to more than pay for it's self in a 3 year life rotation.

Z

no one said anything about using that for a server. what are you talking about? are you in the right thread?

I think I am.
Read my full post as I edited/added to it while you were posting.

Dual cores only have a real current market value in the server area.
Home users will always have a large section that will want to own whatever the "latest" product is even if it cost an arm-n-leg and they can never make full use of it.

I know alot of people who just had to get an AMD 64 when they first came out and just HAD to try running a 64 bit OS.
Systems today run so many times faster and cost so much less than then....and programs for home/office that make use of a 64 bit OS are still almost zero. Those people still try to tell me they can SEE things running faster with thier non compliant 64 bit home OS.

If they are happy well then I am happy for them....it's not my money or problem.

Z
 
Dual cores only have a real current market value in the server area.
Click to expand...

The Unreal 3 tech demo called robohordes that came out in late '05 is a great example of the benefits of dual core. CoD2 and quake 4 have had dual core patches. The fact that the 360 has 3 cores and all the next gen consoles will have multiple cores is going to move the gaming market towards threading even faster. Its not the same as the 64 bit thing.

I am posting this on an AMD system yet watching AMD fans coming up with these excuses is funny.

Its a good chip... Deal with it. Competition is good for the industry and our pocketbooks.


-----------
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_dual-core_performance/page3.asp
 
Dual cores only have a real current market value in the server area.
Click to expand...

The Unreal 3 tech demo called robohordes that came out in late '05 is a great example of the benefits of dual core. CoD2 and quake 4 have had dual core patches. The fact that the 360 has 3 cores and all the next gen consoles will have multiple cores is going to move the gaming market towards threading even faster. Its not the same as the 64 bit thing.

I am posting this on an AMD system yet watching AMD fans coming up with these excuses is funny.

Its a good chip... Deal with it. Competition is good for the industry and our pocketbooks.


-----------
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_dual-core_performance/page3.asp

Thats really nice that a game demo and two games are coded to use dual cores.

I'll run right out and buy one at a high price and install it right away so I can...slow my system down from what it is and hate myself next year when it costs 25-50% less and still don't have anything that makes full use of it.
Not.

Look I am not out to pick a fight or anything. I am just talking about real life useage with what people are/will need and simply pointing out the fact that dual cores at this point in time have no real use vrs cost and loss of speed in ALL useage other than less than a handful programs outside of servers farms (thier largest real market place) at this point.

The 64 bit OS was just an example of the same "home user" mindset and a few people will spend an extra $400-600 for a 2nd gfx card to gain a handfull of fps that they will never see with thier eyes.

If people want to go out and get an FX-60 just to turn a rented DVD into a Divx 1 time a month becuse it uses both cores then go do it if it makes you happy.
I will be happy with my $200 146 @ 2.95 and stock volts which never gets above 38C on air,rip the same Divx and perhaps wait a few secs longer. Well in fact I will most likely d/l the damn thing while I sleep.

But back to my main point about the chip this thread is based on....it is not a product that will sale to those who's company/work would gain from a dual core product nor is a a cpu that I would hawk to those I build systems for.

Z

PS: PasticLSD....stay off the ACID buddy,been there and done that over 40 years ago. :wink:
 
I simply listed the stuff that I know uses dual core off the top of my head.

Your basically just ranting and I swore forum flame wars off so I'm not even gonna press the issue.
 
I simply listed the stuff that I know uses dual core off the top of my head.

Your basically just ranting and I swore forum flame wars off so I'm not even gonna press the issue.
Click to expand...

Look at your quote in my reply 2 posts up.

Ranting?
It is a "good" cpu deal with it?

You can't stay on track with the topics subject nor can you see that that chip is a power hungry waste of money that knowing people would even look at buying.
After that you go off on how game consoles will drive PC's to some how "evolve".

Like I said kid get off the acid it's not helping you.

Z
 
You can see who has a AMD and who doesn’t in here. All the AMD people come and say that a dual core is not worth it as you not going to be using both cores in what ever you do. OK.

You believe that and we will continue on our lag free lives while you swallow your pride just because what you went and bought was "the best" for your needs at the time not considering the benefits of dual core computing.

Now the cue the avid AMD owner/supporter/know-it-all "What do you know about AMD single core systems"

I replaced a FX55 Based machine with what I have now. Why? Because I can and because I now can Render in 3dsmax, play music on winamp 5, write a dvd, copy stuff from a friends machine and still manage to type this without so much of a hint of a lag. Shame and I actually thought the FX55 was fast. It would be begging and pleading right about now let alone let me do anything else while it drags on its way during its single minded existence.

Sure out right performance the FX55 is nothing to be scoffed at but how does this performance fair when some idiot at a lan decides he needs something of your machine right now and you don’t feel like quitting so that he can copy his share to escape the embarrassment of your wonderful machine lagging.

AMD and multi-tasking. Those two words/phrases shouldn’t even be placed in the same sentence. Intel has had the upper hand in this segment from the release of HT and now implemented flawlessly with dual core. AMD releases x2 and the AMD fans finally get a taste of what Intel users have had for the past 2-3 years. All hail the X2. "Hey look guys I can copy something and play a game at the same time without lagging" while the little less significant Intel user sits there and laughs himself to death and the antics of the new and improved AMD X2 user.
 
Dual cores only have a real current market value in the server area.
Click to expand...

The Unreal 3 tech demo called robohordes that came out in late '05 is a great example of the benefits of dual core. CoD2 and quake 4 have had dual core patches. The fact that the 360 has 3 cores and all the next gen consoles will have multiple cores is going to move the gaming market towards threading even faster. Its not the same as the 64 bit thing.

I am posting this on an AMD system yet watching AMD fans coming up with these excuses is funny.

Its a good chip... Deal with it. Competition is good for the industry and our pocketbooks.


-----------
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_dual-core_performance/page3.asp

Thats really nice that a game demo and two games are coded to use dual cores.

I'll run right out and buy one at a high price and install it right away so I can...slow my system down from what it is and hate myself next year when it costs 25-50% less and still don't have anything that makes full use of it.
Not.

Look I am not out to pick a fight or anything. I am just talking about real life useage with what people are/will need and simply pointing out the fact that dual cores at this point in time have no real use vrs cost and loss of speed in ALL useage other than less than a handful programs outside of servers farms (thier largest real market place) at this point.

The 64 bit OS was just an example of the same "home user" mindset and a few people will spend an extra $400-600 for a 2nd gfx card to gain a handfull of fps that they will never see with thier eyes.

If people want to go out and get an FX-60 just to turn a rented DVD into a Divx 1 time a month becuse it uses both cores then go do it if it makes you happy.
I will be happy with my $200 146 @ 2.95 and stock volts which never gets above 38C on air,rip the same Divx and perhaps wait a few secs longer. Well in fact I will most likely d/l the damn thing while I sleep.

But back to my main point about the chip this thread is based on....it is not a product that will sale to those who's company/work would gain from a dual core product nor is a a cpu that I would hawk to those I build systems for. no one is saying your aren't happy with your opteron, but don't be so narrow minded, not everybody needs the same thing.

Z

PS: PasticLSD....stay off the ACID buddy,been there and done that over 40 years ago. :wink:

wait, a second, if he's the one taking drugs, give me some of that. cause he makes more sense then you... first of all, there are gains from dual core... more snappy, more power, and it is necessary, otherwise, everyone would just have a sempron for crying out loud. as for the dual graphics... you failed to know or just forgot that it can put out a lot of eye candy high resolution graphics without taking a hit for frames per second as much as single solutions can... so, the eye will see benefits in other ways then your mentioning. the 64 bit thing i can understand... and you really can't say that it isn't smart to buy for longevity. i can understand why plastic doesn't want to respond cause he sees it's pointless, but i can't stand people giving out false information about things, especially when it's because of their opinion and closed mind.


edit : i think the power consumption issue is being pushed way out of line if you ask me also...

Well I don't "fail to know" anything.

As you ALTERED my post when you quoted it and added these lines:
[code:1:1da9ae157d] no one is saying your aren't happy with your opteron, but don't be so narrow minded, not everybody needs the same thing.
[/code:1:1da9ae157d]
Seeing that I don't think you are a person who I sould take any advice from.

[code:1:1da9ae157d]i can understand why plastic doesn't want to respond cause he sees it's pointless, but i can't stand people giving out false information about things, especially when it's because of their opinion and closed mind.
[/code:1:1da9ae157d]

I agree it is pointless to argu with a person who indicates he is an acid head and can't follow a train of thought after reading a post.

As for you if your implying that I am giving false information...lieing....then you also can not follow/understand what is printed moments after reading it.

Z
 
You guys need to stop arguing. You keep saying its not worth it, your not going to flame or argue. But you keep doing it. lol
I have 3 PCs all with an AMD Athlon XP CPU. The one I'm using now is an athlon XP and in the past I've always gone with AMD. I used the to think AMD was the best period. But I'm glad I was wrong.


The truth: Dual core is worth it, wether its AMD or Intel you will see the difference. While not too many programs/games fully support it yet, the list is growing and the majority of future programs will.
This is cheap dual core, not expensive like most all the other dual core CPUs you'll find. But it is slow. That is where the overclockability of this CPU makes it shine.

Simply pay $50 for an aftermarket cooler and you can hit 3.8 Ghz without a problem. Don't beleive it? Me and my buddy did it last night. And the wattage from it wasn't as outrageous as most you guys think, with his 500W PSU keeping up without a hitch. The wattage the 7900GTX was pulling in was what was outageous (a lot more than the CPU).

But what impressed me was that the CPU didn't bottleneck his video card. Good luck paying around $130 for any other CPU and hoping it doesn't bottleneck a $500 video card.

With this CPU you can now build a top-of-the-line PC for right around $1000. That includes the motherboard, memory, CPU, and Video card. Even less if you don't include a $500 video card.
 
You guys need to stop arguing. You keep saying its not worth it, your not going to flame or argue. But you keep doing it. lol
I have 3 PCs all with an AMD Athlon XP CPU. The one I'm using now is an athlon XP and in the past I've always gone with AMD. I used the to think AMD was the best period. But I'm glad I was wrong.


The truth: Dual core is worth it, wether its AMD or Intel you will see the difference. While not too many programs/games fully support it yet, the list is growing and the majority of future programs will.
This is cheap dual core, not expensive like most all the other dual core CPUs you'll find. But it is slow. That is where the overclockability of this CPU makes it shine.

Simply pay $50 for an aftermarket cooler and you can hit 3.8 Ghz without a problem. Don't beleive it? Me and my buddy did it last night. And the wattage from it wasn't as outrageous as most you guys think, with his 500W PSU keeping up without a hitch. The wattage the 7900GTX was pulling in was what was outageous (a lot more than the CPU).

But what impressed me was that the CPU didn't bottleneck his video card. Good luck paying around $130 for any other CPU and hoping it doesn't bottleneck a $500 video card.

With this CPU you can now build a top-of-the-line PC for right around $1000. That includes the motherboard, memory, CPU, and Video card. Even less if you don't include a $500 video card.
Click to expand...

That's why i'm lookin into this, however what is usually the life longetivity of this kind of processor if I were to keep it OCed at 3.8ghz?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom