Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No

Test Setup For Overclocking

by
System Hardware
AMD Platform AM2 Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe, Rev.1.03G
Nvidia Nforce 5 NVIDIA nForce5, BIOS: 1001 (03/13/2007)
Intel Platform S775 Gigabyte X38-DQ6, Rev. 1.0
Intel X38 Intel X38, BIOS: F7 (01/02/2007)
Intel Platform S775 Gigabyte P35C-DS3R, Rev. 1.0
Intel P35 Intel P35, BIOS: F2o (05/11/2007)
Intel Platform S775 Asus P5B Deluxe/WiFi-AP, Rev. 1.03
Intel P965 Intel 965P, BIOS: 1101 (04/04/2007)
Memory 2x 1GB A-Data DDR2-1066+ Vitesta Extreme Edition
DVD-ROM Samsung SH-D163A , SATA150
Graphics Card Foxconn Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX
GPU: 575 MHz
Shader Clock: 1350 MHz
Memory: 786 MB DDR4 (900 MHz, 384 Bit)
Sound Card Creative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer
Power Supply Zalman, ATX 2.01, 510 Watt
System Software & Drivers
OS Windows Vista Enterprise Version 6.0 (Build 6000)
DirectX 10 DirectX 10 (Vista default)
DirectX 9 Version: April 2007
Sound Driver Vista Driver 2.13.0012 (15.03.2007)
Graphics Driver Nvidia ForceWare Version 158.18 (32 Bit) WHQL
Chipset Driver Version 8.1.1.1010 (21/11/2006)
Intel 631xESB/6321ESB/3100
Version: 8.3.0.1011
Intel 5400
Version: 8.5.0.1007
Intel 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 - SATA
Version: 8.2.0.1011
Intel 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 - USB
Version: 7.4.0.1005
Storage Driver Matrix-Storage Manager 7.0.0.1020
Nvidia Chipset nForce-Treiber: 15.00 (02.02.2007) WHQL
Java Java Runtime Environment 6.0 Update 1
Share:
5
Comments
Read more
X
Submit

Comments
Read the comments on the forums
mactronix 22/02/2008 23:57
Hide
-0+

I will admit to not really being a regular overclocker but isnt the whole point about getting the best out of your hardware and in essance getting something for nothing.
from that view point i would have thought it would have made sence to at least include the 8200 for comparison, If not have done the whole article on it instead of the 8500. Or am i missing the point?

wild9 24/02/2008 03:02
Hide
-0+

Quote :Unlike AMD, which must produce its 90-nm processors closer to their technical and thermal limits to stay competitive, Intel plays on its manufacturing prowess, which is at least 12 months ahead of that of AMD.


Intel has no dedicated inter-connect, no onboard MMU. All inter-core communication for both dual and quad-core CPU's has to go via the FSB. Intel is late catching up because it got complacent.

Also, AMD CPU's at the bottom end still overclock well and are very cheap. I don't think everything is in Intel's favour ;)

wild9 24/02/2008 03:21
Hide
-0+

Quote :However, AMD’s overclocking margins haven’t been as large compared to what Intel’s modern processors offer.


Socket 939 90nm Athlon64 3200+ (2.0GHz) can hit 2.7GHz or more on air. Same for Socket AM2 65nm Athlon64x2 4000+ (2.1GHz).

..not bad considering it's a generation before C2D.

wild9 24/02/2008 23:54
Hide
-0+

Is it me or doesn't there appear ot be much of a difference between the 266 and newer 333MHz FSB speed?

darthpoik 26/02/2008 12:28
Hide
-0+

wild9 :
Intel has no dedicated inter-connect, no onboard MMU. All inter-core communication for both dual and quad-core CPU's has to go via the FSB. Intel is late catching up because it got complacent.Also, AMD CPU's at the bottom end still overclock well and are very cheap. I don't think everything is in Intel's favour



Am I wrong in thinking the intel dual core does have inter core communication on chip. It is the quad core that communicates via the fsb for but only between the two core 2 duo dies.

Best offers

Newsletters


OK