|
Overclockers tend to turn off SpeedStep and other equivalent power-saving features to preserve stability at higher voltages. If you have a need for more CPU power (SCII, BC2/some other console ports, hobbyist rendering, whatever) I don't think anybody's going to say you shouldn't, but it's one of those things that has taken on a life of its own in the minds of idiot enthusiasts, like water cooling and Velociraptors.Jabor posted:Or you can buy a CPU that's lower than what you need...Same performance, lower cost.
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 10:09 |
|
|
BlackMK4 posted:Look at the 930 i7s that are conservatively overclocking to 3.8ghz on air fairly easily. It's not that way anymore, though, because the price difference between mainstream CPUs is much smaller and dependent on # of cores, not clock speed. The closest analogy would be overclocking a Phenom X4 9xx to match the i5 750, which is a bad idea for a bunch of other reasons: heat, power consumption, the 9xx's poorer results in heavily parallel apps, its lack of turbo mode, whatever. None of those were really a concern when you were comparing two Conroes, but multi-core has become so prevalent (and architectures perform so differently, if you're comparing across those) that the "buy cheap and overclock" strategy for the mainstream pretty much died as soon as the Phenom/Athlon II hit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 05:55
|
|
|
Of all the issues to complain about on Atom those are not them (well, maybe HD youtube, but even on my desktop I don't really find enough videos on YT that are both 720p and that I care to watch in high quality to worry about it): dual-view works absolutely fine, 720p video plays well with CoreAVC, and I've never had issues with gif rendering across multiple browsers. Sounds like you need to update your drivers?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 18:59
|
|
|
http://semiaccurate.com/2010/12/10/p67-and-h67-boards-get-priced/ Article is pretty poorly written, but it looks like unless you're willing to go with the absolute cheapest H67 boards you'll be paying a premium. I wouldn't be worrying about choosing an i5 750 at this point for gaming. It's going to be a while before anything seriously requires anything more than a stock Lynnfield: if precedent holds, it'll probably be another 'tick', at least, and people are still hanging in there with overclocked 65nm Core 2s, so it's not as if CPU requirements are at breakneck speeds. You're also going to be at the mercy of all the firmware, compatibility, and individual board issues that usually come with a launch.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2010 14:35
|
|
|
Anandtech says the stock K one is the low-profile cooler a couple times.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2011 11:43
|
|
|
QQmore posted:Has anyone reviewed the stock Asus P67 yet? Interested in a comparison between the Asrock and it. Really don't want to shell out the money for a Pro when the z series is still yet to come out. Anandtech posted:However, the second question is: ‘what about the comparison to the ASRock P67 Extreme4’? The ASRock board has power/reset buttons on the board, a Debug LED, that USB 3.0 bracket which will hold an SSD (worth in my option about $15), and is almost $40 cheaper. The ASUS board is the slightly better performing, overclocking is easier on the ASUS, the ASUS has a longer warranty, the UEFI is slightly better on the ASUS, the ASUS uses Intel Ethernet rather than Realtek, but the ASRock will take socket 775 coolers. It is up to you to judge, but in my opinion, I would take the Extreme4, pocket the $40 difference, and invest it in something else for a PC build. e: oh, the regular P8P67? Don't think so. I'd probably pay the extra $10 or $20 for the ASUS board. e2: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/motherboards/2011/01/12/asus-p8p67-review/1 & http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1500/1/ seem to indicate it's just as solid as the Pro. Srebrenica Surprise fucked around with this message at 04:04 on Jan 23, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 03:59
|
|
|
This wasn't exactly what I meant but yeah. The Lynnfield launch was a good example of the more minor issues: basically everybody had been recommending Gigabyte P35/P45 since forever, and I think one of my early posts in the old parts picking thread was a list of all these reasons why you should buy a Gigabyte P55-UD2 or whatever over equivalent P55 boards. Turned out that while the overwhelming majority were okay, some people with different RAM ended up having memory compatibility issues and HOTS was full of people with new i5 750 builds that were all hosed up. P67 launched pretty well with regard to weird board-related quirks but nobody buying this early should expect completely smooth sailing. That said, I'd rather have to plug my drives into the SATA 6gbps or Marvell SATA slots instead of 3gbps than have to return my motherboard or RAM to NewEgg, get hit with a restocking fee, and pick another, so I guess it's progress.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 02:44
|
|
|
Looks like the dual-core mobile "i5" (god I wish they'd just stick to i3 for dual/i5 for quad/i7 for HT) Ivy Bridge stuff launched a month after the desktop quad parts. Not sure whether to hold out for said hypothetical T440 or buy a T430 with the NVS 5400M now as far as GPU performance given the rumors of the extra SPs being there more for power consumption than anything.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2012 20:13
|
|
|
So does the disabled C-states on the Srebrenica Surprise fucked around with this message at 10:17 on Dec 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2015 09:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 10:09 |
|
|
Sorry, to clarify, I meant Skylake, which isn't at all 'non-Z' overclocking, I've just been reading way too much Haswell stuff and momentarily forgot that's a different thing. I'd definitely be using a Z board, with a locked i5-6500. Just wasn't sure what the behavior would be since no Turbo/C-states implies to me "no frequency or voltage stepping whatsoever", but if it steps voltage at all, that should be fine.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2015 10:16
|
|