If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Core 2 Extreme QX9650 rig, my O/C swansong?
Phil recently posted here about how the 'mighty have fallen' w/r/t some of
the heroic tales of overclocks here in years past. I agreed, saying that there is so much power in modern CPUs that the benefit of squeezing every last MHz out of your system is hardly apparent other than when you run (increasingly complex) benchmarks. I remember my first 'epic' o/c, getting a Celeron 600 (Coppermine) rock-solid stable at 900MHz, a 50% o/c, using nothing more complex to cool it than a fairly small hunk of aluminium with fins with a fan screwed to it. *That* was noticable, very much so. I was getting equal performance of a high-end PIII out of a budget processor and my games flew. That wasn't my first o/c, that honour belongs to a Pentium 90 that I coaxed into running at 100MHz. A mere 10% o/c. Since then I've overclocked everything I could to varying degrees, and if I couldn't o/c it (i.e. laptops) I'd undervolt it. I left Intel for AMD when they went the way of that abomination, the Pentium 4. My last AMD CPU, an unlocked Barton 2500+ (running at 3200+ speed) saw me through to my first Core 2 Duo (a direct descendant of the PIII with very little of the despised P4 DNA). It was about then, with my E4500, that I started to realise that I was overclocking for the sake of it, going through the motions but really the only noticable result of my efforts was that I was having to pay for more electricity. I managed to get that 2.2GHz dual-core CPU running at 3.3GHz, another 50%er, and justified it to myself by running SETI (which I'd been doing from the first week of it 'going live' anyway). My electricity bill and my SETI score were the only real indicators of my overclocking, I'm not into bleeding-edge gaming so have always used merely 'mid-range' graphics cards. Then, in about 2006 I started building what, although I didn't realise it at the time, was to (probably) be my last desktop machine. (I'm an invalid on welfare with a compression-fracture of the lower back, a chronic-pain patient in constant torment. I lost my home, my business and my life-savings trying to work through my injury, refusing to accept that I couldn't continue with my life-plan. I'd just started my business, borrowing against my home and, pre-injury, after years of working for the man, I was set to 'make it'.) Over the years I've had to abandon all of my cherished vices such as tobacco, alcohol, playing pool, fishing, socialising etcetera etcetera ad nauseum, due to lack of funds. The last bastion of my previously hedonistic lifestyle that I clung to was building and overclocking computers. As I couldn't afford to keep buying new hardware myself I often got my fix by building and o/cing rigs for my more affluent 'friends'. This last build of mine, that started on '06 and (almost) ended yesterday started with an Asus P5KE-WiFi-AP, a mobo that supported the upcoming 45nm CPUs, had Japanese-sourced solid electrolytic capacitors (as I'd re-capped far more mobos than I care to think about) and a then staggering eight-phase VRM. I'd just finished assembling a rig for a gamer friend which utilised the P5K Deluxe and a 'G0' Q6600. It was a great board to use and o/c (especially once Asus released a few BIOS updates) and the far cheaper E version that I bought, other than some fancy SB / NB / VRM heatsinking / piping and one or two 'features' that I'd never use, was essentially indentical. They were built on the same PCB and used the same VRM. It was always my aim to run a fast 45nm C2Q in it. I wasn't going to mess with a 65nm quad for myself when, at the time my E4500 was doing everything that I wanted with plenty in reserve. I would wait until the price of this 'new' CPU was within my reach. After a year or so I replaced the E4500 with an E7400, a more efficient 45nm CPU that dissapointingly didn't o/c any higher than the 'slower' 65nm CPU that it replaced. However it *was* more efficient and ran a lot cooler. The CPU cooler that I'd chosen to run in this system was a Thermaltake Mini-Typhoon but with a Thermalright 'bolt-thru' kit instead of those horrid plastic push-pins. It didn't have the numbers of something like a T.R.U.E. or a Scythe but I've always liked a 'top-down' cooler for the way that they keep circulation around the VRMs, essentially doing double-duty. I also liked the all-copper construction and the fact that it wasn't massive. A while before I'd used the copper-cored factory Q6600 HS/F that was discarded from the above-mentioned friend's build to cool my E4500 to it's 50% o/c. The Tt Mini-T didn't allow me to o/c it higher but did run it quite a bit cooler. I wasn't overly-impressed with the three-wire fan on the Tt though so, with a Dremel and some Araldite, I adapted the Intel Q6600 four-wire fan to fit the Tt (and the four-wire fan header on the mobo) as they're both 90mm. Now the mobo could control the fan speed, keeping it at a silent 1200 rpm at idle and ramping up to 3000+ rpm as the temps went up. The Intel fan moved a lot more air than the supplied Tt fan when called upon to do so which suits me just fine as that's when the area around the CPU needs most cooling. Anyway, to the present-day. This week I *finally* took delivery of my fast 45nm C2Q, four years after the project started. It's a Core 2 Extreme QX9650 as mentioned in the subject. A 3GHz, 12MB L2 CPU with an unlocked multiplier, a CPU that I've coveted since it was released in '07 (at NZ$1,950 per unit). I got mine, a brand new (even though they were discontinued in '09) OEM 'tray' CPU for NZ$400. I nearly didn't go through with it as, for the last couple of years I've been using a ThinkPad T60 laptop (with a beautiful IPS 4:3 1400 x 1050 display, T7400 2.16GHz C2D, 3GB RAM, 7.2K HDD...) as my day-to-day machine and it does all that I want it to easilly. However I wanted to finish the project that I started back in '06, even if I only run the machine for maybe a couple days a month, so I put the QX9650 'on the plastic'. I probably don't need the processing-power that this rig will provide but, more than anything I guess, I wanted to 'finish' my project. The CPU arrived yesterday so, pre-fitting it I updated the mobo BIOS (I was three releases behind) and cleaned the small amount of dust from the fans and fins. Then I fitted the QX9650 with the last of my AS5 and fired it up at stock speed. There were no dramas and it idled at ~12șC above room temp, ~6șC above case temp. There are four 7.2K HDDs in the case, in removable bays, set up as hot-swappable. The case is an iCute and has a 24cm / 600rpm fan in the side. I ran Prime95 for ~15 mins and the core temps got up to around ambient + 25șC (A+25). Then, as I know that the mobo and the RAM both handle it with aplomb and I like 1:1 FSB / RAM I upped the CPU FSB from it's stock 333 (1333 if you're into marketing terminology) to 400MHz* and left the multilpier and vcore at stock. It fired up at 3.6GHz and I left it running Prime while I Googled o/cing a QX9650. (* I learned a long time ago that X CPU running at X GHz isn't the whole story by far. The FSB speed is very important. For instance, as I discovered with the unlocked Athlon XP T'breds and Bartons, 2GHz with a 200MHz FSB needs a tad more vcore, runs slightly hotter and benchmarks higher than the same CPU at 2GHz on a 166 FSB. Therefore, when overclocking an unlocked CPU I decide on what FSB speed I want to run, then take it from there with the multiplier. This board will run 500MHz FSB just fine but then I need to run the RAM at 4:5 and experience has shown me that a 1:1 ratio is slightly better. The board and the DDR2-800 RAM will run at 450MHz but I need to feed it a little more VDIMM above stock and DDR2 RAM isn't getting cheaper. I want the 6GB (2 x 2GB + 2 x 1GB) that I have to last the life of the machine. Ergo my optimum FSB is 400MHz.) This is turning into a long post but rest assured, it's likely my last ever post about my overclocking. Anyway, while the machine was running Prime at 3.6GHz I found many, many pages dealing with o/cing the QX9650. I guess that's an advantage of buying a CPU that's been around a few years. I opened a bunch of pages in tabs on the laptop. Then, as Prime hadn't thrown any errors I re-booted the heavy iron, setting the multipier to 10 (4GHz) while leaving the vcore at stock (1.240V according to CPU-Z). However althoug it POSTed fine it wouldn't go into Windows so I dropped the multi 0.5 (3.8GHz) and it booted fine at default vcore. I set about some reading while I left Prime running. From my reading it seems that most all QX9650s will run at 4GHz on air, even using the stock HS/F (which I didn't get with my OEM CPU) with just a small vcore increase as long as the case is well-ventilated. They're all C1 stepping as far as I can tell so, other than the luck of the draw with the silicon, identical. Most sources agreed that 4.25GHz was easilly achieveable with water cooling and taking the vcore up to around 1.45V but that any higher than that needed a big vcore boost and resulted in a *lot* of heat. The best source that I found on o/cing these CPUs, which was referenced in a lot of forums is http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404 "Overclocking Intel's New 45nm QX9650: The Rules Have Changed" from December '07. It's well worth a read IMO, even if you don't have a QX9650 or even a 45nm Socket 775 CPU. It's a well-researched and well-writen article. Anyway, a passage in that article made me change my mind about finding the limits of my 'new' CPU. It basically re-stated what I'd said in response to Phil's post a month or two back. I quote: ........................................ "We honestly believe a new direction in CPU overclocking may soon be upon us. While there will always be those that continue to push processors to their absolute limits, the majority of us will find our new "performance" benchmark in efficiency. This makes sense though - the market has been heading this way for years now and overclockers may have simply chosen to ignore the obvious. The multi-core era we now live in places a heavy emphasis on performance-per-watt figures and other measurable efficiencies." ........................................ Heh! I thought I was being original when I said similar here yet here it is from a three-year old article. So, my motivation in finishing what is likely to be my last 'new' build was to get the best possible (or close to it) Socket 775 system and, by adding a bit more money to what I'd already spent on it, have a machine that would hopefully last me many years without being gutless. So, for now I left my FSB at 400MHz but dropped the multi to 7.5 so that the CPU is running at stock speed, 3.0GHz. However I *dropped* the vcore to the lowest that my mobo will allow, 1.10V in BIOS, 1.04V in windows under full load according to CPU-Z. The machine ran Prime95 all night with those settings and the CPU fan didn't have to increase above it's 1200rpm minimum to keep the cores below ~45șC, A+25. There is plenty of power in this machine to last me a long time at that speed as far as I can tell. So, perhaps this isn't my last overclocking story. Maybe, in a year or three I might have to squeeze some more grunt out of this CPU. Watch this space..... Thanks for reading this far (if you did). May all your boxen be cool and stable. -- Shaun. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Core 2 Extreme QX9650 rig, my O/C swansong?
I read all of it thinking ah!! the good ole days........
I feel that with every new chipset/CPU coming out nowadays there really is not much of an advantage to overclocking unless you want bragging rights... If you check the "reviews" of the last few mobo you will note a vast increase in power consumption...but then that never stopped anyone in the past and I feel it wont stop anyone except us older users now. I run a Core2 duo that is oc'd by 40% on air and that's good enough for me. I am in the market to buy another system..maybe the new Intel coming out next month,Maybe a X58 chipset mobo and CPU to match...but I dont think I will be playing with settings too much. sorry to hear about your poor health peter If you find a posting or message from me offensive,inappropriate or disruptive,please ignore it. If you dont know how to ignore a posting complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate :-) "~misfit~" wrote in message ... Phil recently posted here about how the 'mighty have fallen' w/r/t some of the heroic tales of overclocks here in years past. I agreed, saying that there is so much power in modern CPUs that the benefit of squeezing every last MHz out of your system is hardly apparent other than when you run (increasingly complex) benchmarks. I remember my first 'epic' o/c, getting a Celeron 600 (Coppermine) rock-solid stable at 900MHz, a 50% o/c, using nothing more complex to cool it than a fairly small hunk of aluminium with fins with a fan screwed to it. *That* was noticable, very much so. I was getting equal performance of a high-end PIII out of a budget processor and my games flew. That wasn't my first o/c, that honour belongs to a Pentium 90 that I coaxed into running at 100MHz. A mere 10% o/c. Since then I've overclocked everything I could to varying degrees, and if I couldn't o/c it (i.e. laptops) I'd undervolt it. I left Intel for AMD when they went the way of that abomination, the Pentium 4. My last AMD CPU, an unlocked Barton 2500+ (running at 3200+ speed) saw me through to my first Core 2 Duo (a direct descendant of the PIII with very little of the despised P4 DNA). It was about then, with my E4500, that I started to realise that I was overclocking for the sake of it, going through the motions but really the only noticable result of my efforts was that I was having to pay for more electricity. I managed to get that 2.2GHz dual-core CPU running at 3.3GHz, another 50%er, and justified it to myself by running SETI (which I'd been doing from the first week of it 'going live' anyway). My electricity bill and my SETI score were the only real indicators of my overclocking, I'm not into bleeding-edge gaming so have always used merely 'mid-range' graphics cards. Then, in about 2006 I started building what, although I didn't realise it at the time, was to (probably) be my last desktop machine. (I'm an invalid on welfare with a compression-fracture of the lower back, a chronic-pain patient in constant torment. I lost my home, my business and my life-savings trying to work through my injury, refusing to accept that I couldn't continue with my life-plan. I'd just started my business, borrowing against my home and, pre-injury, after years of working for the man, I was set to 'make it'.) Over the years I've had to abandon all of my cherished vices such as tobacco, alcohol, playing pool, fishing, socialising etcetera etcetera ad nauseum, due to lack of funds. The last bastion of my previously hedonistic lifestyle that I clung to was building and overclocking computers. As I couldn't afford to keep buying new hardware myself I often got my fix by building and o/cing rigs for my more affluent 'friends'. This last build of mine, that started on '06 and (almost) ended yesterday started with an Asus P5KE-WiFi-AP, a mobo that supported the upcoming 45nm CPUs, had Japanese-sourced solid electrolytic capacitors (as I'd re-capped far more mobos than I care to think about) and a then staggering eight-phase VRM. I'd just finished assembling a rig for a gamer friend which utilised the P5K Deluxe and a 'G0' Q6600. It was a great board to use and o/c (especially once Asus released a few BIOS updates) and the far cheaper E version that I bought, other than some fancy SB / NB / VRM heatsinking / piping and one or two 'features' that I'd never use, was essentially indentical. They were built on the same PCB and used the same VRM. It was always my aim to run a fast 45nm C2Q in it. I wasn't going to mess with a 65nm quad for myself when, at the time my E4500 was doing everything that I wanted with plenty in reserve. I would wait until the price of this 'new' CPU was within my reach. After a year or so I replaced the E4500 with an E7400, a more efficient 45nm CPU that dissapointingly didn't o/c any higher than the 'slower' 65nm CPU that it replaced. However it *was* more efficient and ran a lot cooler. The CPU cooler that I'd chosen to run in this system was a Thermaltake Mini-Typhoon but with a Thermalright 'bolt-thru' kit instead of those horrid plastic push-pins. It didn't have the numbers of something like a T.R.U.E. or a Scythe but I've always liked a 'top-down' cooler for the way that they keep circulation around the VRMs, essentially doing double-duty. I also liked the all-copper construction and the fact that it wasn't massive. A while before I'd used the copper-cored factory Q6600 HS/F that was discarded from the above-mentioned friend's build to cool my E4500 to it's 50% o/c. The Tt Mini-T didn't allow me to o/c it higher but did run it quite a bit cooler. I wasn't overly-impressed with the three-wire fan on the Tt though so, with a Dremel and some Araldite, I adapted the Intel Q6600 four-wire fan to fit the Tt (and the four-wire fan header on the mobo) as they're both 90mm. Now the mobo could control the fan speed, keeping it at a silent 1200 rpm at idle and ramping up to 3000+ rpm as the temps went up. The Intel fan moved a lot more air than the supplied Tt fan when called upon to do so which suits me just fine as that's when the area around the CPU needs most cooling. Anyway, to the present-day. This week I *finally* took delivery of my fast 45nm C2Q, four years after the project started. It's a Core 2 Extreme QX9650 as mentioned in the subject. A 3GHz, 12MB L2 CPU with an unlocked multiplier, a CPU that I've coveted since it was released in '07 (at NZ$1,950 per unit). I got mine, a brand new (even though they were discontinued in '09) OEM 'tray' CPU for NZ$400. I nearly didn't go through with it as, for the last couple of years I've been using a ThinkPad T60 laptop (with a beautiful IPS 4:3 1400 x 1050 display, T7400 2.16GHz C2D, 3GB RAM, 7.2K HDD...) as my day-to-day machine and it does all that I want it to easilly. However I wanted to finish the project that I started back in '06, even if I only run the machine for maybe a couple days a month, so I put the QX9650 'on the plastic'. I probably don't need the processing-power that this rig will provide but, more than anything I guess, I wanted to 'finish' my project. The CPU arrived yesterday so, pre-fitting it I updated the mobo BIOS (I was three releases behind) and cleaned the small amount of dust from the fans and fins. Then I fitted the QX9650 with the last of my AS5 and fired it up at stock speed. There were no dramas and it idled at ~12șC above room temp, ~6șC above case temp. There are four 7.2K HDDs in the case, in removable bays, set up as hot-swappable. The case is an iCute and has a 24cm / 600rpm fan in the side. I ran Prime95 for ~15 mins and the core temps got up to around ambient + 25șC (A+25). Then, as I know that the mobo and the RAM both handle it with aplomb and I like 1:1 FSB / RAM I upped the CPU FSB from it's stock 333 (1333 if you're into marketing terminology) to 400MHz* and left the multilpier and vcore at stock. It fired up at 3.6GHz and I left it running Prime while I Googled o/cing a QX9650. (* I learned a long time ago that X CPU running at X GHz isn't the whole story by far. The FSB speed is very important. For instance, as I discovered with the unlocked Athlon XP T'breds and Bartons, 2GHz with a 200MHz FSB needs a tad more vcore, runs slightly hotter and benchmarks higher than the same CPU at 2GHz on a 166 FSB. Therefore, when overclocking an unlocked CPU I decide on what FSB speed I want to run, then take it from there with the multiplier. This board will run 500MHz FSB just fine but then I need to run the RAM at 4:5 and experience has shown me that a 1:1 ratio is slightly better. The board and the DDR2-800 RAM will run at 450MHz but I need to feed it a little more VDIMM above stock and DDR2 RAM isn't getting cheaper. I want the 6GB (2 x 2GB + 2 x 1GB) that I have to last the life of the machine. Ergo my optimum FSB is 400MHz.) This is turning into a long post but rest assured, it's likely my last ever post about my overclocking. Anyway, while the machine was running Prime at 3.6GHz I found many, many pages dealing with o/cing the QX9650. I guess that's an advantage of buying a CPU that's been around a few years. I opened a bunch of pages in tabs on the laptop. Then, as Prime hadn't thrown any errors I re-booted the heavy iron, setting the multipier to 10 (4GHz) while leaving the vcore at stock (1.240V according to CPU-Z). However althoug it POSTed fine it wouldn't go into Windows so I dropped the multi 0.5 (3.8GHz) and it booted fine at default vcore. I set about some reading while I left Prime running. From my reading it seems that most all QX9650s will run at 4GHz on air, even using the stock HS/F (which I didn't get with my OEM CPU) with just a small vcore increase as long as the case is well-ventilated. They're all C1 stepping as far as I can tell so, other than the luck of the draw with the silicon, identical. Most sources agreed that 4.25GHz was easilly achieveable with water cooling and taking the vcore up to around 1.45V but that any higher than that needed a big vcore boost and resulted in a *lot* of heat. The best source that I found on o/cing these CPUs, which was referenced in a lot of forums is http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404 "Overclocking Intel's New 45nm QX9650: The Rules Have Changed" from December '07. It's well worth a read IMO, even if you don't have a QX9650 or even a 45nm Socket 775 CPU. It's a well-researched and well-writen article. Anyway, a passage in that article made me change my mind about finding the limits of my 'new' CPU. It basically re-stated what I'd said in response to Phil's post a month or two back. I quote: ........................................ "We honestly believe a new direction in CPU overclocking may soon be upon us. While there will always be those that continue to push processors to their absolute limits, the majority of us will find our new "performance" benchmark in efficiency. This makes sense though - the market has been heading this way for years now and overclockers may have simply chosen to ignore the obvious. The multi-core era we now live in places a heavy emphasis on performance-per-watt figures and other measurable efficiencies." ........................................ Heh! I thought I was being original when I said similar here yet here it is from a three-year old article. So, my motivation in finishing what is likely to be my last 'new' build was to get the best possible (or close to it) Socket 775 system and, by adding a bit more money to what I'd already spent on it, have a machine that would hopefully last me many years without being gutless. So, for now I left my FSB at 400MHz but dropped the multi to 7.5 so that the CPU is running at stock speed, 3.0GHz. However I *dropped* the vcore to the lowest that my mobo will allow, 1.10V in BIOS, 1.04V in windows under full load according to CPU-Z. The machine ran Prime95 all night with those settings and the CPU fan didn't have to increase above it's 1200rpm minimum to keep the cores below ~45șC, A+25. There is plenty of power in this machine to last me a long time at that speed as far as I can tell. So, perhaps this isn't my last overclocking story. Maybe, in a year or three I might have to squeeze some more grunt out of this CPU. Watch this space..... Thanks for reading this far (if you did). May all your boxen be cool and stable. -- Shaun. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Core 2 Extreme QX9650 rig, my O/C swansong?
Somewhere on teh intarwebs peter wrote:
I read all of it thinking ah!! the good ole days........ Yeah, I know what you mean. I used to really enjoy the days when squeezing every last (stable and sustainable) MHz out of your CPU was not only a challenge but you noticably reaped the rewards for your efforts. I feel that with every new chipset/CPU coming out nowadays there really is not much of an advantage to overclocking unless you want bragging rights... Exactly! With these C2D/Q CPUs I found that the days spent tweaking settings and stress-testing for stability just weren't giving the rewards that they used to as, most of the time the cores are running at well below 40% usage anyway. (As I mentioned I'm not a bleeding-edge gamer nor do I do a lot of encoding. Also I can't afford to run SETI 24/7 like I used to so the extra capability of an o/ced, already very powerful CPU is almost never used.) If you check the "reviews" of the last few mobo you will note a vast increase in power consumption...but then that never stopped anyone in the past and I feel it wont stop anyone except us older users now. Ahhh, OK. I've pretty much stopped reading about the latest hardware, either on websites or in magazines. It was too much like I was teasing myself as it makes me 'get the itch' to try my hand again, see what I could squeeze out of one of these new beasties. There's no point making oneself yearn for the unattainable IME, it only leads to discontent with current equipment. Also, I don't know about elsewhere but power seems to go up way more often here than it used to and in larger increments. Anyway, don't these newer systems basically dynamically overclock themselves if the demand for CPU cycles gets high? Where's the fun in that? I run a Core2 duo that is oc'd by 40% on air and that's good enough for me. Yep, that's a bloody good result. I am in the market to buy another system..maybe the new Intel coming out next month,Maybe a X58 chipset mobo and CPU to match...but I dont think I will be playing with settings too much. Can't say I blame you, as I mentioned, not only are they way more powerful than most users need but I think they have a feature (turbo-boost?) that means they dynamically OC themselves! Boring. It seems that the art of the O/C is dead. No more point in spending months researching, reading reviews (and this group, which used to be *the* best source of info and informed advice), then up to weeks tweaking settings, optimising airflow patterns and stress-testing the results. sorry to hear about your poor health Thanks, I just re-read my post and didn't realise that I'd harped on about it so much! Way OT, I think it's just that the gaping wound in my available credit was still raw combined with the sadness at my final acceptance of the fact that something I'd enjoyed for years, essentially my last indulgence (as I could sort-of justify it to myself), was now redundant. :-( Best of luck with your new system when you get it Peter. You can always load up CPU-Z and watch as it O/Cs itself! snip my lament on the death of the art of O/Cing -- Cheers, Shaun. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
P5K3 Deluxe with QX9650 | Robert Robertson | Asus Motherboards | 2 | January 4th 08 08:32 PM |
Pwr supply for both Pentium 4 and Core 2 Extreme | WannaKatana | Homebuilt PC's | 2 | December 12th 06 02:28 PM |
Overclocking Core 2 Duo extreme - guide | GreenBean | Overclocking | 18 | November 24th 06 02:43 PM |
Overclocking Core 2 Duo extreme - guide | GreenBean | Overclocking AMD Processors | 19 | November 24th 06 02:43 PM |
CORE 2 DUO 2.93 EXTREME AND P5W DH DELUXE | hotrod | Asus Motherboards | 6 | October 2nd 06 11:03 PM |