Opinions on CPU choice please....

I'm thinking of replacing my E4500 @ 3.32GHz with a 45nm part as this was
always my plan on buying this mobo (P5K-E WiFi-AP).

I'm on a tight budget. I was considering getting an E8400, that was always
my plan. However, I see that an E7200 is only 2/3 of the price, has a higher
multiplier and lower default FSB. I'm wondering how much real-world
difference the larger L2 of the E8400 would make? Especially considering
that I think the E7200 will reach a higher clock speed.

(Currently my mobo doesn't seem to want to go above 414MHz FSB. I'm running
the E4500 with a 8x multi [and my DDR2-800 synchronously]. I tried lowering
the multi to 7x and raising the FSB but didn't have any luck despite raising
the NB and SB voltages. I'd like to hit 4GHz with a 45nm CPU or I don't
think it's worth the upgrade. 9.5 [E7200 max multi] x 414 = 3.933GHz. I'm
hoping to eke another 8Mhz out of the FSB to hit the magic 4GHz mark. 9 x is
the max multi for an E8400 meaning I'd need to hit a 445 FSB. shrug Could
be possible although I don't know why I can't get higher than 414 ATM.)

As I said, I think I'll be able to clock the E7200 higher and it's NZ$100
cheaper. Will I regret not having the extra L2? I'm planning on keeping this
PC about as long as I kept my last one at least, 5 years. (I have a mobo all
ready for the E4500, currently running a Celeron 420, so I'm not just
upgrading one PC with this purchase.)

TIA,
--
Shaun.

DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)

On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:15:11 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

I'm thinking of replacing my E4500 @ 3.32GHz with a 45nm part as this
was always my plan on buying this mobo (P5K-E WiFi-AP).

I'm on a tight budget. I was considering getting an E8400, that was
always my plan. However, I see that an E7200 is only 2/3 of the price,
has a higher multiplier and lower default FSB. I'm wondering how much
real-world difference the larger L2 of the E8400 would make? Especially
considering that I think the E7200 will reach a higher clock speed.

(Currently my mobo doesn't seem to want to go above 414MHz FSB. I'm
running the E4500 with a 8x multi [and my DDR2-800 synchronously]. I
tried lowering the multi to 7x and raising the FSB but didn't have any
luck despite raising the NB and SB voltages. I'd like to hit 4GHz with a
45nm CPU or I don't think it's worth the upgrade. 9.5 [E7200 max multi]
x 414 = 3.933GHz. I'm hoping to eke another 8Mhz out of the FSB to hit
the magic 4GHz mark. 9 x is the max multi for an E8400 meaning I'd need
to hit a 445 FSB. shrug Could be possible although I don't know why I
can't get higher than 414 ATM.)

As I said, I think I'll be able to clock the E7200 higher and it's
NZ$100 cheaper. Will I regret not having the extra L2? I'm planning on
keeping this PC about as long as I kept my last one at least, 5 years.
(I have a mobo all ready for the E4500, currently running a Celeron 420,
so I'm not just upgrading one PC with this purchase.)

TIA,

It all depends on the applications that you are running, there are some
programs that are very sensitive to cache size but most won't be all that
sensitive. If you are running something that is highly cache sensitive
then upgrading to an E8Xxx will be helpful otherwise it won't unless you
can overclock the new part significantly more that the old part.

The new E0 stepping is supposed to have more overclocking potential, some
of the hardware sites are claiming that they can run the 8600 at 4.5GHz.
The E0 stepping is due out in the next couple of weeks however the only
way that you can guarantee getting it is to buy an 8600 which is the new
top speed grade, if you buy anything else chances are you'll get the
older version unless you wait for a few months to allow the old stock to
clear out.

Somewhere on teh intarweb "General Schvantzkopf" typed:
On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:15:11 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

I'm thinking of replacing my E4500 @ 3.32GHz with a 45nm part as this
was always my plan on buying this mobo (P5K-E WiFi-AP).

I'm on a tight budget. I was considering getting an E8400, that was
always my plan. However, I see that an E7200 is only 2/3 of the
price, has a higher multiplier and lower default FSB. I'm wondering
how much real-world difference the larger L2 of the E8400 would
make? Especially considering that I think the E7200 will reach a
higher clock speed.

(Currently my mobo doesn't seem to want to go above 414MHz FSB. I'm
running the E4500 with a 8x multi [and my DDR2-800 synchronously]. I
tried lowering the multi to 7x and raising the FSB but didn't have
any luck despite raising the NB and SB voltages. I'd like to hit
4GHz with a 45nm CPU or I don't think it's worth the upgrade. 9.5
[E7200 max multi] x 414 = 3.933GHz. I'm hoping to eke another 8Mhz
out of the FSB to hit the magic 4GHz mark. 9 x is the max multi for
an E8400 meaning I'd need to hit a 445 FSB. shrug Could be
possible although I don't know why I can't get higher than 414 ATM.)

As I said, I think I'll be able to clock the E7200 higher and it's
NZ$100 cheaper. Will I regret not having the extra L2? I'm planning
on keeping this PC about as long as I kept my last one at least, 5
years. (I have a mobo all ready for the E4500, currently running a
Celeron 420, so I'm not just upgrading one PC with this purchase.)

TIA,

It all depends on the applications that you are running, there are
some programs that are very sensitive to cache size but most won't be
all that sensitive. If you are running something that is highly cache
sensitive then upgrading to an E8Xxx will be helpful otherwise it
won't unless you can overclock the new part significantly more that
the old part.

Yeah, thanks. I'm pretty much aware of that. I use my machine for light
gaming (you can get an idea of how light by my GPU, a 7800GT) and SETI.
Other than that I don't do anything that a Tualatin wouldn't do just fine.
Oh, the rare video encode but nothing that I couldn't leave to run
overnight. In fact I don't do anything that I couldn't do just as well on my
old Barton XP2500+ (clocked to 2.2GHz) / ti4400. The thing is, I want this
PC to have the potential to last as long as possible, I'm on an invalid's
benefit and won't be making a major purchase for a long time to come. Also,
I'm an overclocker so I'd like to feed that side of my hobby.

Therefore I guess how well it performs in applications is really secondary,
I mainly want a part that I can get a good overclocking result with at a
price I can afford, which points me to the E7200. I mean, sure, it has less
cache than an E8400 but it has *more* cache than the E4500 that I'm running
now so it's still an upgrade in the cache department.

I was rather hoping that some folks here might have real-world experience
with OCing an E7200. Last time I hit the forums I didn't see much about
them, I guess I'm going to have to go look again...

The new E0 stepping is supposed to have more overclocking potential,
some of the hardware sites are claiming that they can run the 8600 at
4.5GHz. The E0 stepping is due out in the next couple of weeks
however the only way that you can guarantee getting it is to buy an
8600 which is the new top speed grade, if you buy anything else
chances are you'll get the older version unless you wait for a few
months to allow the old stock to clear out.

Hmmm, the E0 sounds good. However, *this week* (and until the next bill
hits) I can pay for a new CPU (note I don't say "can afford" :-( ). I'd
rather get one when I don't have to put it on a credit card. Also, if the E0
stepping is so good I reckon it'll be a long time until it trickles down to
the E7200s as they're likely to be, at least partly, downgraded E8xxx CPUs,
hopefully just with cache problems (and half of the E8xxx's 6MB disabled)
rather than clocking issues. Then I have the added complication of living in
New Zealand. We tend to be up to a half-year behind the US with new
steppings as stock is already bought. (It's different with new models, they
hit the shelves within a week....)

Thanks again.
--
Shaun.

DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)

~misfit~ wrote:
Somewhere on teh intarweb "General Schvantzkopf" typed:
On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:15:11 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

I'm thinking of replacing my E4500 @ 3.32GHz with a 45nm part as this
was always my plan on buying this mobo (P5K-E WiFi-AP).

I'm on a tight budget. I was considering getting an E8400, that was
always my plan. However, I see that an E7200 is only 2/3 of the
price, has a higher multiplier and lower default FSB. I'm wondering
how much real-world difference the larger L2 of the E8400 would
make? Especially considering that I think the E7200 will reach a
higher clock speed.

(Currently my mobo doesn't seem to want to go above 414MHz FSB. I'm
running the E4500 with a 8x multi [and my DDR2-800 synchronously]. I
tried lowering the multi to 7x and raising the FSB but didn't have
any luck despite raising the NB and SB voltages. I'd like to hit
4GHz with a 45nm CPU or I don't think it's worth the upgrade. 9.5
[E7200 max multi] x 414 = 3.933GHz. I'm hoping to eke another 8Mhz
out of the FSB to hit the magic 4GHz mark. 9 x is the max multi for
an E8400 meaning I'd need to hit a 445 FSB. shrug Could be
possible although I don't know why I can't get higher than 414 ATM.)

As I said, I think I'll be able to clock the E7200 higher and it's
NZ$100 cheaper. Will I regret not having the extra L2? I'm planning
on keeping this PC about as long as I kept my last one at least, 5
years. (I have a mobo all ready for the E4500, currently running a
Celeron 420, so I'm not just upgrading one PC with this purchase.)

TIA,
It all depends on the applications that you are running, there are
some programs that are very sensitive to cache size but most won't be
all that sensitive. If you are running something that is highly cache
sensitive then upgrading to an E8Xxx will be helpful otherwise it
won't unless you can overclock the new part significantly more that
the old part.

Yeah, thanks. I'm pretty much aware of that. I use my machine for light
gaming (you can get an idea of how light by my GPU, a 7800GT) and SETI.

If you want to crunch SETI, then seriously consider a quad core. Even
the cheapest Q6600 will crunch more WU than any dual core will as you
can run four instances simultaneously instead of two in BOINC manager.
My Q6600, even when running at stock speeds, can crunch 4-5 times as
many WU as my old AMD64 XP3700 in the same time period (which is no
slouch itself on single threaded applications).

If you want this as a long term machine, remember that more and more new
applications and games will be compiled to thread better with
multi-cores so the quad is probably the better long term solution unless
you intend to upgrade again in a couple of years time.

Somewhere on teh intarweb "2CA001" typed:
~misfit~ wrote:
Somewhere on teh intarweb "General Schvantzkopf" typed:
On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:15:11 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

I'm thinking of replacing my E4500 @ 3.32GHz with a 45nm part as
this was always my plan on buying this mobo (P5K-E WiFi-AP).

I'm on a tight budget. I was considering getting an E8400, that was
always my plan. However, I see that an E7200 is only 2/3 of the
price, has a higher multiplier and lower default FSB. I'm wondering
how much real-world difference the larger L2 of the E8400 would
make? Especially considering that I think the E7200 will reach a
higher clock speed.

(Currently my mobo doesn't seem to want to go above 414MHz FSB. I'm
running the E4500 with a 8x multi [and my DDR2-800 synchronously].
I tried lowering the multi to 7x and raising the FSB but didn't
have any luck despite raising the NB and SB voltages. I'd like to
hit 4GHz with a 45nm CPU or I don't think it's worth the upgrade.
9.5 [E7200 max multi] x 414 = 3.933GHz. I'm hoping to eke another
8Mhz out of the FSB to hit the magic 4GHz mark. 9 x is the max
multi for an E8400 meaning I'd need to hit a 445 FSB. shrug
Could be possible although I don't know why I can't get higher
than 414 ATM.) As I said, I think I'll be able to clock the E7200
higher and it's
NZ$100 cheaper. Will I regret not having the extra L2? I'm planning
on keeping this PC about as long as I kept my last one at least, 5
years. (I have a mobo all ready for the E4500, currently running a
Celeron 420, so I'm not just upgrading one PC with this purchase.)

TIA,
It all depends on the applications that you are running, there are
some programs that are very sensitive to cache size but most won't
be all that sensitive. If you are running something that is highly
cache sensitive then upgrading to an E8Xxx will be helpful
otherwise it won't unless you can overclock the new part
significantly more that the old part.

Yeah, thanks. I'm pretty much aware of that. I use my machine for
light gaming (you can get an idea of how light by my GPU, a 7800GT)
and SETI.


Hi, thanks for the reply.

If you want to crunch SETI, then seriously consider a quad core. Even
the cheapest Q6600 will crunch more WU than any dual core will as you
can run four instances simultaneously instead of two in BOINC manager.
My Q6600, even when running at stock speeds, can crunch 4-5 times as
many WU as my old AMD64 XP3700 in the same time period (which is no
slouch itself on single threaded applications).

SETI is a minor thing. I like to do some crunching but it's not compelling
enough a reason for me to go 4 core over 2. (See below.)

If you want this as a long term machine, remember that more and more
new applications and games will be compiled to thread better with
multi-cores so the quad is probably the better long term solution
unless you intend to upgrade again in a couple of years time.

I agree that, in 5 years, most new apps will be multi-core aware. However,
couple of things: I'm still using an abandonware email client last updated
in '01. I use Word 2000, my latest computer game is 5 years old and I'm
intending to keep running XP Pro for the foreseeable future.

Also, as I mentioned, I'm on a budget and quads cost more to run than duals
as well as to buy. (Prices from my usual supplier, in NZ doallars: E7200 -
$209, E8400 - $296, Q6600 - $330. I can actually get an E7200 OEM 'tray' CPU
without cooler [which I don't need anway] for $175 though, not much more
than half the price of the Q6600.) I'm an overclocker and want to get the
most out of the CPU and can't afford to upgrade my cooling solution as well
as my CPU so I don't see an overclocked quad in my near future. My cooler is
great for OCing duals but I don't think it would allow me to find the limits
of a quad. And not overclocking to the best of my ability/equipment is out
of the question, it's in my blood, has been since I had a Pentium 90. (I
didn't try with anything older, I didn't know enough to risk the investment
back then.)

Ultimately I don't think I'm going to be seriously disadvantaged in the next
5 years by *only* having a dual core @ 4GHz. Also, a dual @ 4GHz is going to
be pretty close to a stock Q6600 as far as SETI output goes and will likely
use less electricity per WU being a 45nm part.

Thanks for your input, I take everything on board. :-)
--
Shaun.

DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)

Somewhere on teh intarweb "~misfit~" typed:
Somewhere on teh intarweb "2CA001" typed:
Hi, thanks for the reply.

If you want to crunch SETI, then seriously consider a quad core. Even the
cheapest Q6600 will crunch more WU than any dual core will
as you can run four instances simultaneously instead of two in BOINC
manager. My Q6600, even when running at stock speeds, can crunch 4-5
times as many WU as my old AMD64 XP3700 in the same time period
(which is no slouch itself on single threaded applications).

SETI is a minor thing. I like to do some crunching but it's not
compelling enough a reason for me to go 4 core over 2. (See below.)

If you want this as a long term machine, remember that more and more
new applications and games will be compiled to thread better with
multi-cores so the quad is probably the better long term solution
unless you intend to upgrade again in a couple of years time.

I agree that, in 5 years, most new apps will be multi-core aware.
However, couple of things: I'm still using an abandonware email
client last updated in '01. I use Word 2000, my latest computer game
is 5 years old and I'm intending to keep running XP Pro for the
foreseeable future.
Also, as I mentioned, I'm on a budget and quads cost more to run than
duals as well as to buy. (Prices from my usual supplier, in NZ
doallars: E7200 - $209, E8400 - $296, Q6600 - $330. I can actually
get an E7200 OEM 'tray' CPU without cooler [which I don't need anway]
for $175 though, not much more than half the price of the Q6600.) I'm
an overclocker and want to get the most out of the CPU and can't
afford to upgrade my cooling solution as well as my CPU so I don't
see an overclocked quad in my near future. My cooler is great for
OCing duals but I don't think it would allow me to find the limits of
a quad. And not overclocking to the best of my ability/equipment is
out of the question, it's in my blood, has been since I had a Pentium
90. (I didn't try with anything older, I didn't know enough to risk
the investment back then.)
Ultimately I don't think I'm going to be seriously disadvantaged in
the next 5 years by *only* having a dual core @ 4GHz. Also, a dual @
4GHz is going to be pretty close to a stock Q6600 as far as SETI
output goes and will likely use less electricity per WU being a 45nm
part.
Thanks for your input, I take everything on board. :-)

Oh well, after I hit 'send', while I still had the web pages open from
getting the prices to quote, I ordered a bare E7200, NZ$178 including tax
and postage. That's quite a bit less than I paid for this E4500 last year.

I should have known I'd talk myself into the E7200 if I didn't hear
convincing reasons to get the E8400. I'm saving around NZ$100 not buying the
E8400 so will be able to eat *something* in the coming weeks. Also, and I
could be wrong here, I'm thinking that the smaller L2 will mean less chance
of errors (fewer transistors) for a given clock speed and also lower power
consumption/heat output.

I suppose now I'm going to see half a dozen posts telling me I've done the
wrong thing. g

What bothers me is the fact that I'm probably going to have to pull my
motherboard *twice* (and there's two optical drives and four HDDs in an
averaged-sized case). I lapped this E4500 and it reduced temps by ~7°C under
100% load. The IHS was really dished. However, I don't want to lap a CPU
OOTB, until I know it's going to work OK. Oh, didn't explain, I have a
Thermaltake MiniTyphoon cooler with a ThermalRight bolt-thru kit meaning
bracket on back, mobo removal to remove CPU.

I must buy a right-angled philips screwdriver too, it's near-impossible to
get to the screwheads on the bolts otherwise, I tightened them with pliers
last time, (thinking it *might* be the last time). I'd look at finding
hex-head bolts to replace them with except I don't like not having my
machine running and I'm in a fairly small town, I might not be able to
source them locally.

Ho hum. I was getting withdrawals from my hardware habit anyway, this should
'fix' it for a while. g
--
Shaun.

DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)

Somewhere on teh intarweb "~misfit~" typed:
Somewhere on teh intarweb "~misfit~" typed:
Somewhere on teh intarweb "2CA001" typed:
Hi, thanks for the reply.

If you want to crunch SETI, then seriously consider a quad core.
Even the cheapest Q6600 will crunch more WU than any dual core will
as you can run four instances simultaneously instead of two in BOINC
manager. My Q6600, even when running at stock speeds, can crunch 4-5
times as many WU as my old AMD64 XP3700 in the same time period
(which is no slouch itself on single threaded applications).

SETI is a minor thing. I like to do some crunching but it's not
compelling enough a reason for me to go 4 core over 2. (See below.)

If you want this as a long term machine, remember that more and more
new applications and games will be compiled to thread better with
multi-cores so the quad is probably the better long term solution
unless you intend to upgrade again in a couple of years time.

I agree that, in 5 years, most new apps will be multi-core aware.
However, couple of things: I'm still using an abandonware email
client last updated in '01. I use Word 2000, my latest computer game
is 5 years old and I'm intending to keep running XP Pro for the
foreseeable future.
Also, as I mentioned, I'm on a budget and quads cost more to run than
duals as well as to buy. (Prices from my usual supplier, in NZ
doallars: E7200 - $209, E8400 - $296, Q6600 - $330. I can actually
get an E7200 OEM 'tray' CPU without cooler [which I don't need anway]
for $175 though, not much more than half the price of the Q6600.) I'm
an overclocker and want to get the most out of the CPU and can't
afford to upgrade my cooling solution as well as my CPU so I don't
see an overclocked quad in my near future. My cooler is great for
OCing duals but I don't think it would allow me to find the limits of
a quad. And not overclocking to the best of my ability/equipment is
out of the question, it's in my blood, has been since I had a Pentium
90. (I didn't try with anything older, I didn't know enough to risk
the investment back then.)
Ultimately I don't think I'm going to be seriously disadvantaged in
the next 5 years by *only* having a dual core @ 4GHz. Also, a dual @
4GHz is going to be pretty close to a stock Q6600 as far as SETI
output goes and will likely use less electricity per WU being a 45nm
part.
Thanks for your input, I take everything on board. :-)

Oh well, after I hit 'send', while I still had the web pages open from
getting the prices to quote, I ordered a bare E7200, NZ$178 including
tax and postage. That's quite a bit less than I paid for this E4500
last year.
I should have known I'd talk myself into the E7200 if I didn't hear
convincing reasons to get the E8400. I'm saving around NZ$100 not
buying the E8400 so will be able to eat *something* in the coming
weeks. Also, and I could be wrong here, I'm thinking that the smaller
L2 will mean less chance of errors (fewer transistors) for a given
clock speed and also lower power consumption/heat output.

I suppose now I'm going to see half a dozen posts telling me I've
done the wrong thing. g

What bothers me is the fact that I'm probably going to have to pull my
motherboard *twice* (and there's two optical drives and four HDDs in
an averaged-sized case). I lapped this E4500 and it reduced temps by
~7°C under 100% load. The IHS was really dished. However, I don't
want to lap a CPU OOTB, until I know it's going to work OK. Oh,
didn't explain, I have a Thermaltake MiniTyphoon cooler with a
ThermalRight bolt-thru kit meaning bracket on back, mobo removal to
remove CPU.
I must buy a right-angled philips screwdriver too, it's
near-impossible to get to the screwheads on the bolts otherwise, I
tightened them with pliers last time, (thinking it *might* be the
last time). I'd look at finding hex-head bolts to replace them with
except I don't like not having my machine running and I'm in a fairly
small town, I might not be able to source them locally.

Ho hum. I was getting withdrawals from my hardware habit anyway, this
should 'fix' it for a while. g

Still talking to myself. g

Turns out that I couldn't get the tray E7200 and had already transfered
funds so I topped it up and got a boxed E7300 (multi = 10 x 400MHz FSB =
4GHz) instead. It was still cheaper than an E8400 and hopefully will be a
lot easier to OC.

A quick Google with the words 'overclock' and 'E7300' lead me to believe
that it should hit 4GHz easilly as around 1.36V or less. fingers crossed
and that a lot of samples are doing 4.2GHz.

Wish me luck. Damn the weekend! It means a couple extra days until I get it.
--
Shaun.

DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)

In article ,
says...
snip

Still talking to myself. g

Turns out that I couldn't get the tray E7200 and had already transfered
funds so I topped it up and got a boxed E7300 (multi = 10 x 400MHz FSB =
4GHz) instead. It was still cheaper than an E8400 and hopefully will be a
lot easier to OC.

A quick Google with the words 'overclock' and 'E7300' lead me to believe
that it should hit 4GHz easilly as around 1.36V or less. fingers crossed
and that a lot of samples are doing 4.2GHz.

Wish me luck. Damn the weekend! It means a couple extra days until I get it.


Good luck with the E7300. If it's as easy to overclock as my E8400,
you'll be lovin'it. Mine's running at 3.61GHz just by raising the
front side bus to 400 from 333. Nothing else was changed from auto.
One of these days I'll get around to see what it will do, but it will
take a bigger case with better cooling no room to fit a large
cooler in my present case. Thermaltake VF1000

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811133035

Bill

Somewhere on teh intarweb "Bill" typed:
In article ,
says...
snip

Still talking to myself. g

Turns out that I couldn't get the tray E7200 and had already
transfered funds so I topped it up and got a boxed E7300 (multi = 10
x 400MHz FSB = 4GHz) instead. It was still cheaper than an E8400 and
hopefully will be a lot easier to OC.

A quick Google with the words 'overclock' and 'E7300' lead me to
believe that it should hit 4GHz easilly as around 1.36V or less.
fingers crossed and that a lot of samples are doing 4.2GHz.

Wish me luck. Damn the weekend! It means a couple extra days until I
get it.

Good luck with the E7300.

Thanks Bill. :-)

If it's as easy to overclock as my E8400,
you'll be lovin'it. Mine's running at 3.61GHz just by raising the
front side bus to 400 from 333.

Nice! I'm hoping to raise my FSB to 400 to, only with the E7300 it's from
266. I doubt I'll get there with default vcore but I can hope. g

Nothing else was changed from auto.
One of these days I'll get around to see what it will do, but it will
take a bigger case with better cooling no room to fit a large
cooler in my present case. Thermaltake VF1000

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811133035

That's tiny!

I have a really good case for cooling, it's an iCute S901-5G1-BB, on this
page:

http://icute.com.tw/english/S901.html

They're relatively inexpensive but excellent for cooling, the best I've
seen.

I have an extra 12cm fan for the front so there are two blowing in over my 4
HDDs with a DVD writer mounted at the top and a CDROM at the bottom. I have
a 12cm fan exhausting from under the PSU (another 12cm fan in PSU) as well
as the 25cm fan on the side. I actually have to reduce the cooling in winter
as my HDDs run *too* cold! My current E4500 2.2GHz @ 3.32GHz idles at
ambient + 8°C and runs 100% load at ambient +24°. (Ambient ranges from 15°
to 26°.) That's with a Thermaltake MiniTyphoon all copper top-down cooler
(to ensure good cooling of the VRM MOSFETs).

I'm looking forward to getting my E7300 and will be happy if it will run at
10 x 400MHz for 4GHz fingers crossed. That's a 150% OC, a bit less than
I'm getting now with my 65nm E4500. If it does that fine I don't think I'll
try pushing the envelope any more. (Yeah, right!)

Cheers,
--
Shaun.

DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)

~misfit~ wrote:

That's tiny!

I have a really good case for cooling, it's an iCute S901-5G1-BB, on this
page:

http://icute.com.tw/english/S901.html

They're relatively inexpensive but excellent for cooling, the best I've
seen.

I have an extra 12cm fan for the front so there are two blowing in over my 4
HDDs with a DVD writer mounted at the top and a CDROM at the bottom. I have
a 12cm fan exhausting from under the PSU (another 12cm fan in PSU) as well
as the 25cm fan on the side. I actually have to reduce the cooling in winter
as my HDDs run *too* cold! My current E4500 2.2GHz @ 3.32GHz idles at
ambient + 8°C and runs 100% load at ambient +24°. (Ambient ranges from 15°
to 26°.) That's with a Thermaltake MiniTyphoon all copper top-down cooler
(to ensure good cooling of the VRM MOSFETs).

I'm looking forward to getting my E7300 and will be happy if it will run at
10 x 400MHz for 4GHz fingers crossed. That's a 150% OC, a bit less than
I'm getting now with my 65nm E4500. If it does that fine I don't think I'll
try pushing the envelope any more. (Yeah, right!)

Cheers,

My last case was an iCute. Brilliant case! That 25cm side fan blows
plenty of cool air over everything. It came with the clear plastic side
panel and lots of blue LEDs on the fan. Ho hum! I'm not into that so I
disconnected them. One thing I do like about having a clear side panel
is that you can see when things get a little dusty inside. I have always
regularly cleaned out the dust in my cases, but I do it even more so now
that I can see.

I have an e8400 with the FSB upped to 400, STD voltage, Corsair
TWIN2X2048-6400C4DHX 4-4-4-12 voltage upped to 2.1v on a Gigabyte P23C-DS3R.
Still quite new at OCing, but having fun!