# Should I get an E6750?



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

I am currently running an Asus P5W DH Deluxe with an E6400. This chip can do 3.2GHz at 1.4v, but given this overclockability of these boards, I am probably limited to 440 FSB max and therefore 3.52GHz max.

Now I've got over $200 burning a hole in my pocket and I'm thinking about a CPU upgrade. I know a Q6600 is out as they don't do well on 975X boards, but what about an E6750? They have 4MB cache (instead of the 2MB on the E6400)and a 10x multi, which could allow me to go higher than the chip will. Ironically the E6600's are more than the E6750, but is that for any special reason? I do know the E6750 will be a G0 stepping...

Are the E6750's good overclockers? Will the extra 2MB cache make any difference? Any advice would be appreciated.

EDIT:  OK, I messed up .  I thought the E6750's were 10x @ 1066, not 8x @ 1333.  So now I'm asking if I should get an E6600/6700/6850.

EDIT AGAIN: I bought an E6850.  If you want to talk more about this chip, then post, but I'm no longer looking for suggestions.


----------



## d44ve (Sep 18, 2007)

why not sell your e6400 for 100 bucks... take your 200 bucks and pick up a *e6850*

Thats the route I would go


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

Yeah, that's a possibility, but if I went with the cheaper CPU I'd have an extra $100 to put toward a second HD2900XT 

Edit:  Aw, crap - I just noticed the E6750 was 1333 FSB, not 1066 like I though.  Duh, that means the multi is 8, not 10.


----------



## ccleorina (Sep 18, 2007)

Wait for the E8X00 or QX95XX out next year.... that should be fast C2D.... i cant wait to get them....


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

Quads are out for me - I don't feel like upgrading my mobo for a new CPU


----------



## pt (Sep 18, 2007)

t_ski said:


> Quads are out for me - I don't feel like upgrading my mobo for a new CPU



your mobo is compatible with quads afaik


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Sep 18, 2007)

well my 6750 does 3.6ghz for 24/7 at 450x8 at 1.425v.runs very cool too.


----------



## reueljoab (Sep 18, 2007)

E6750 is a very good processor... i run mine at 3.48ghz 435x8 at 1.3875v.


----------



## HookeyStreet (Sep 18, 2007)

t_ski said:


> Yeah, that's a possibility, but if I went with the cheaper CPU I'd have an extra $100 to put toward a second HD2900XT
> 
> Edit:  Aw, crap - I just noticed the E6750 was 1333 FSB, not 1066 like I though.  Duh, that means the multi is 8, not 10.



I was then about to burst your bubble and tell you taht m8 

The E6700 is a very good CPU (because of the 1066fsb and 10x multi)


----------



## Lt_JWS (Sep 18, 2007)

Well like you say the P5WDH's aren't exactly known for great FSB speeds so you should probably keep what you've got unless you get get something with a 9x Multi. But all in all the E6750 is a great CPU for the price


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

pt said:


> your mobo is compatible with quads afaik



Correct, my mobo is compatible, but the 975X chipset is not good for overclocking Quads.  If I got a Q6600 I'd probably be looking at a max of 330-340 FSB, which only gets me around 2.6-2.7GHz.  Those numbers come from the "P5W DH Problems and Fixes" thread over at Xtreme Systems.

But since I mistakenly thought the E6750 was a 10x multi, I have now changed the thread to E6600/6700/6850.


----------



## spixel (Sep 18, 2007)

id get an e6700. cause of the multiplier :> ps : what mch voltage you using on ur 975x


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Sep 18, 2007)

a 6700 is'nt a G0 tho' is it? the 6750 will run cooler for a given oc,but the 10x multi is useful.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

spixel said:


> ps : what mch voltage you using on ur 975x



IIRC it's 1.6v for 400FSB.  I figure I'd have to max it (1.65v) to get up around 440.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

tigger69 said:


> a 6700 is'nt a G0 tho' is it? the 6750 will run cooler for a given oc,but the 10x multi is useful.



Yeah, the 6700 isn't a G0, but I think I need the 10x more than the reduced heat output.


----------



## TUngsten (Sep 18, 2007)

t_ski said:


> IIRC it's 1.6v for 400FSB.  I figure I'd have to max it (1.65v) to get up around 440.



that sounds crazy - I run my e6400 at 3.2g / 400fsb @ 1.365v and it's 8+ hrs orthos stable

what bios are you running?


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Sep 18, 2007)

s'ok bud,i can dig that.a 10x multi is good for ocing,easy to work out clock speeds.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

TUngsten said:


> that sounds crazy - I run my e6400 at 3.2g / 400fsb @ 1.365v and it's 8+ hrs orthos stable
> 
> what bios are you running?



No, he was asking about MCH voltage, not vCore.  vcore is only 1.4v (in the bios) for 3.2GHz.

Bios is the latest (2205 IIRC).


----------



## TUngsten (Sep 18, 2007)

phew! 
I think you can safely run the vMCH at max (1.75v) provided you have decent airflow in your case. I've read a lot of RAM settings posts at the various memory manufacturer techsites (OCZ, Corsair etc) and most of the OCZ techs recommend that voltage for OCing their ram


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

Yeah, I was thinking the max MCH was something like 1.75v, but I looked in the manual and only saw 1.65v.  Doing some testing at stock speeds right now but I'll reboot in a little bit to OC it back to 3.2GHz.

Thanks for the tip - I'll have to go see about some G.Skill timings (right now it' @ 4-4-4-12).


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

MCH is running at 1.75v, but max is 1.85v.  I'm willing to watercool the chipset if needed.


----------



## DOM (Sep 18, 2007)

have you tryed finding th max bus speed on your mobo ? by lowering the multiplier ?


----------



## t_ski (Sep 18, 2007)

No, I haven't had the time to tinker that much with it, but around the net a stock P5W DH is limited to about 440 FSB.  With vmods, it can go higher.


----------



## DOM (Sep 18, 2007)

what kind of oc are you looking to get 4GHz+


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 18, 2007)

d44ve said:


> why not sell your e6400 for 100 bucks... take your 200 bucks and pick up a *e6850*
> 
> Thats the route I would go



Hey d44ve, I have read that only a few motherboards support this CPU{E6850},..sounded fishy to me but I wanted to ask you.


----------



## DOM (Sep 18, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> Hey d44ve, I have read that only a few motherboards support this CPU{E6850},..sounded fishy to me but I wanted to ask you.


Here are the ASUS mobos supported  even for the 45nm cpu's
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=35492


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 18, 2007)

I can recommend the E6850, mine will do 4.2Gig at a push on air and boot to windows but not particularily stable, at 4.1Gig she is as stable as a rock (see specs).  I run mine 24/7 at 3.8Gig on 1.425V and she idles at 28C and only 40C full load.

Even with the limit of your FSB you will get 3.7Gig+ with the 9x multi but you will do that 24/7 on abbout 1.4V!!!!!


----------



## mitsirfishi (Sep 19, 2007)

there will be a slight advantage but i would say if you  get the energy effienct quad core q6600 uses a newer core rather than the b2 then go for that 400fsb=3.6ghz which would be nice on moderate volts


----------



## t_ski (Sep 19, 2007)

DOM_ATI_X800XL_PCI-E said:


> what kind of oc are you looking to get 4GHz+



I'd like 3.6GHz, but anything over that would be icing on the cake


----------



## hat (Sep 19, 2007)

I would just keep the money. Your system is fast as hell and 3.2GHz to 3.5GHz isn't a very big improvement.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 19, 2007)

Shit sorry, I got your max FSB wrong, for some reason I thought you said 413FSB, in that case, If you really dont want a Quad why not go for a E4500, it's a fairly cheap option,  you get the higher 11 multi which should get you to around 3.9Gig on your FSB.......now I dont think it will do anywhere near that but they can do 3.6Gig with some decent air cooling, and as I said, a fairly budget option.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 19, 2007)

If I can afford the faster chip (looking st the E6850 right now) I'll buy it.  The extra cache will probably be worth it alone.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 19, 2007)

t_ski said:


> If I can afford the faster chip (looking st the E6850 right now) I'll buy it.  The extra cache will probably be worth it alone.



I understand why you would say that but IMO it would not be sensible bang for buck if you are limited to a 360FSB....honestly you can get cheaper options, if you want the full 4mb L2 cache and are limited to that FSB your money would be better spent therefore buying the E6600 which is cheaper, will easily hit your max FSB and therefore you are going to actually be using more of its potential for the money you spend, why pay a fair bit more for an identical chip with a slightly cooler stepping and a higher FSB for the same performance....it's not like the 6600 runs hot in any case and of course you still get the 9x multi.....either way you will have identical performance at 360FSB on either chip but spend less on the 6600.

Unless of course your budget will stretch to the E6700 (not sure of the price comparison where you are), that gives you the 10x multi and therefore will reach higher speeds, even that option IMO would be better than the 6850 although it is a wonderful chip, I have one but it's real strength is it's high overclocks.

Edit:

At Newegg the E6700 is only $10 more than the E6850....it's here:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115002

So if you have the money go for the 6700 with the 10 multi, if you dont, get the 6600.....simple really!


----------



## Mussels (Sep 19, 2007)

E6600 is 266FSB at start, E6750/6850 are 333. with a 360 max, the E6600 with the lower FSB/higher multi is the better choice, as you'd get exactly the same clocks as an E6850 would, and the lower models would come nowhere near it - and at the same MHz, the performance difference might as well be nothing.


Edit: oh and the cache doesnt matter much at all, the real performance hit is due to the FSB/memory clocks, so after OC'ing theres barely any difference between an allendale and a conroe (i've owned a few, and it was barely 1s superpi difference (14s to roughly 15s) at the same clocks (cant remember now, around 3.5G)


----------



## t_ski (Sep 19, 2007)

Why are you saying the E6850's are 360 max?  I know my board will go higher - is the chip limited to that or something?


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 19, 2007)

t_ski said:


> Why are you saying the E6850's are 360 max?  I know my board will go higher - is the chip limited to that or something?



No you said in an earlier post that your board would not do above 360FSB??????  unless I read it wrong.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 19, 2007)

t_ski said:


> If I got a Q6600 I'd probably be looking at a max of 330-340 FSB, which only gets me around 2.6-2.7GHz.  Those numbers come from the "P5W DH Problems and Fixes" thread over at Xtreme Systems.



I said earlier I'd be limited only if I got a Quad core CPU.  Those chips don't seem to do well in a 975X chipset/mobo.  Right now with my E6400 I'm running at 400FSB x 8 for a total of 3.2GHz.

From everything I read so far, with a C2D CPU (ie: not a quad) I'm limited by the chipset at around 440 max.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 19, 2007)

OK, I found a great deal on E6850 (thanks to nflesher87).  Hopefully it will be here soon and everything will work out fine.

BTW, to SK-1 and others, I did look up this CPU on the Asus compatibility charts and it says it's supported after BIOS 2101 or something like that.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 19, 2007)

t_ski said:


> OK, I found a great deal on E6850 (thanks to nflesher87).  Hopefully it will be here soon and everything will work out fine.
> 
> BTW, to SK-1 and others, I did look up this CPU on the Asus compatibility charts and it says it's supported after BIOS 2101 or something like that.



Dont worry....it does!  Actually Asus was the first to implement BIOS updates for 1333FSB compatibility way before they ever appeared, I bought my board back in January I think and it stated it was compatible on the box!  Even though the BIOS update had not come out by then :shadedshu


----------



## DOM (Sep 19, 2007)

Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.00GHz,1333FSB,L2:4MB,rev.G0)    ALL  2103 

And there latest bios is Beta Version 2301 

Have fun


----------



## t_ski (Sep 19, 2007)

Yep.  According to CPU-z (I haven't rebooted to verify) I'm on 2206.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 19, 2007)

t_ski said:


> Yep.  According to CPU-z (I haven't rebooted to verify) I'm on 2206.



Time to start flying!  Just got my new cooler, was having to use the Intel stock as my old one kinda blew up, I am sure with this one I will get 4.2Gig stable outta her


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 19, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> Dont worry....it does!  Actually Asus was the first to implement BIOS updates for 1333FSB compatibility way before they ever appeared, I bought my board back in January I think and it stated it was compatible on the box!  Even though the BIOS update had not come out by then :shadedshu



Well my best offer{219} was accepted from Ebay and a new E6850 is on it's way!!
Time to sell my MB,RAM and CPU.


----------



## niko084 (Sep 20, 2007)

I just ordered an e6750, great deal chip and even though they have an 8x multi they are supposed to clock quite very well.. Although ram could limit you with good timings if you want 1:1


----------



## t_ski (Sep 20, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> Time to start flying!  Just got my new cooler, was having to use the Intel stock as my old one kinda blew up, I am sure with this one I will get 4.2Gig stable outta her



What did you get?


----------



## ghost101 (Sep 20, 2007)

Whats wrong with the e6400 at 3.2?

Why not just put the $200 towards your hd 2900xt fund?


----------



## t_ski (Sep 20, 2007)

Gotta have more power, Scotty.  BEsides, if I figure everything right, I'll have enought in the fund for the E6850 _and_ another 2900XT


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 20, 2007)

ghost101 said:


> Whats wrong with the e6400 at 3.2?
> 
> Why not just put the $200 towards your hd 2900xt fund?



e6400 even at 3.2 would bottleneck his 2900XT if not already, then with successive driver updates without doubt
this would only be greatly compounded if he went CF while still using the e6400
this should set him right as he'll probably be able to get around 4.0 out of the e6850 

hope it serves you well t


----------



## t_ski (Sep 20, 2007)

nflesher87 said:


> ...he'll probably be able to get around 4.0 out of the e6850
> 
> hope it serves you well t



Wouldn't that be sweet? 4G's 

Thanks for everything, n


----------



## Ravenas (Sep 20, 2007)

t_ski said:


> I am currently running an Asus P5W DH Deluxe with an E6400. This chip can do 3.2GHz at 1.4v, but given this overclockability of these boards, I am probably limited to 440 FSB max and therefore 3.52GHz max.
> 
> Now I've got over $200 burning a hole in my pocket and I'm thinking about a CPU upgrade. I know a Q6600 is out as they don't do well on 975X boards, but what about an E6750? They have 4MB cache (instead of the 2MB on the E6400)and a 10x multi, which could allow me to go higher than the chip will. Ironically the E6600's are more than the E6750, but is that for any special reason? I do know the E6750 will be a G0 stepping...
> 
> ...



I say step up to the quad, just my 2 cents


----------



## t_ski (Sep 20, 2007)

nah, it's a done deal.  E6850 is on it's way.


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 20, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> I say step up to the quad, just my 2 cents



quad would've most likely meant a mobo switch as well, plus more than $100 in extra investment, I think he did the right thing, especially at the deal he got!


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 20, 2007)

t_ski said:


> What did you get?



The one in my specs now, with a 3 fan mod, this one comes with a fan in the middle!! the fins are in 2 blocks, quite a clever design if you want to add some extra fans, with the 3 silent fans it's supposed to be as good as the very best and it's pretty cheap.


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 20, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> The one in my specs now, with a 3 fan mod, this one comes with a fan in the middle!! the fins are in 2 blocks, quite a clever design if you want to add some extra fans, with the 3 silent fans it's supposed to be as good as the very best and it's pretty cheap.



that's pretty sweet bro, nice to see you get her so high! 4.1 is max OC right? what're you running 24/7?


----------



## ghost101 (Sep 20, 2007)

nflesher87 said:


> e6400 even at 3.2 would bottleneck his 2900XT if not already, then with successive driver updates without doubt
> this would only be greatly compounded if he went CF while still using the e6400
> this should set him right as he'll probably be able to get around 4.0 out of the e6850
> 
> hope it serves you well t



Only reason you'd get 2900XTs in crossfire is because you want to play at around 1900x1200 resolution. So no it wouldnt be CPU limited. At lower resolutions, yes he may be CPU limited, he'd be getting 120 fps instead of 80fps. 

Clearly a good invesment. [/sarcasm]

And when say Crysis comes out, enough to stress both 2900XTs, then we go back to the scenario where he's GPU limited again.

IMO $200 on a dual core CPU is just a waste. Should be looking at the q6600 if he's looking to upgrade the CPU (obviously would need the mobo upgrade as well). Just save up for a more extensive system upgrade.


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 21, 2007)

^ Not a waste. Tell me how many programs take full advantage of 4 cores now, or in the next 12 mts.for that matter.I think we just had a decent thread on this subject. Most power users upgrade that often anyway.  A 4Ghz 2 core will outdo an overclocked 4 core on the programs most of us here use at this point in time.
If I am wrong on this, please give me some logical rational.(as long as you are not a video editor)


----------



## DOM (Sep 21, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> ^ Not a waste. Tell me how many programs take full advantage of 4 cores now, or in the next 12 mts.for that matter.I think we just had a decent thread on this subject. Most power users upgrade that often anyway.  A 4Ghz 2 core will outdo an overclocked 4 core on the programs most of us here use at this point in time.
> If I am wrong on this, please give me some logical rational.(as long as you are not a video editor)


Have you seen this ? Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs. Core 2 Duo E6850


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 21, 2007)

guys, he got this chip at an amazing price so stop trying to argue he should've gone quad
the mobo he already has will be able to push the e6850 to the limits
for him to push a q6600 to it's limit he would've had to change mobos AND spend around $70 more for the quad, making it just not worth it


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 21, 2007)

nflesher87 said:


> that's pretty sweet bro, nice to see you get her so high! 4.1 is max OC right? what're you running 24/7?



No 4.2Gig is max overclock, I can run superPIetc at those speeds but I would be dishonest if I said it was totally stable   She is fully stable at 4.1Gig but I run her 24/7 at 3.9Gig cause to be honest at those speeds you dont notice the difference in everyday computing and I prefer the lower temps and volts, at 3.9Gig she is on 1.46V (Real) idleing at about 34C and about 48-50C full load with this cooler.


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 21, 2007)

nice man those are good temps for 24/7


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 21, 2007)

nflesher87 said:


> nice man those are good temps for 24/7



Thanks, the really good thing is with this fairly cheap cooler, modded with the extra fans it's actually 6C cooler at idle and 9C cooler at load than my old Skythe Infinity and I had fitted an extra 120mm fan onto that!  But then again, to be fair, G0 steppings are supposed to run cooler.


----------



## d44ve (Sep 21, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> Thanks, the really good thing is with this fairly cheap cooler, modded with the extra fans it's actually 6C cooler at idle and 9C cooler at load than my old Skythe Infinity and I had fitted an extra 120mm fan onto that!  But then again, to be fair, G0 steppings are supposed to run cooler.




I would think that would have to be due to the G0 stepping like you mentioned.

The G0 runs A LOT cooler than its counterpart


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 21, 2007)

d44ve said:


> I would think that would have to be due to the G0 stepping like you mentioned.
> 
> The G0 runs A LOT cooler than its counterpart



Your right but I also meant that when my Artic Freezer 7 pro went last week I used the Infinity for 3 days on this same chip and it didnt perform as well as the Scythe mine with the extra fans.  I manged to get the Infinity working using some of the pushpins from the Freezer pro, by then tho I had already ordered the Mine.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Sep 21, 2007)

this is the board im getting to replace my p5b-dlx-->http://www.tekheads.co.uk/s/product?product=607890

you guys reckon the 6750 will do ok in it?


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 21, 2007)

DOM_ATI_X800XL_PCI-E said:


> Have you seen this ? Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs. Core 2 Duo E6850



Yes, and that is the article that spurred my comment.The E6850 in the article is running @ 3.85
and keeps pace or betters the Q6600 in the apps most of us care about.
Running at 4.1 {Like Tatty's) it will smoke the quad in the apps I care about {GAMES}


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 21, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> Yes, and that is the article that spurred my comment.The E6850 in the article is running @ 3.85
> and keeps pace or betters the Q6600 in the apps most of us care about.
> Running at 4.1 {Like Tatty's) it will smoke the quad in the apps I care about {GAMES}



I suppose the bottom line is....in genuine multi-threadded apps, as opposed to just dual core optimised (3D Mark 2006 for instance) the Quad is always going to be in front and is a good solid bet but at the moment, for games for instance (almost every game) a fast dual core is enough and if that duellie can push out more Mhz than the Quad all well and good, but the REAL day of the quad is getting closer and closer, just not quite enuff support out there just yet but even in gaming, DX10 and onwards may well even change the way we play games and Quads could well be the answer.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 21, 2007)

It's all just a matter of I hadm $200 to spend on this.  I could in no way afford a new CPU and a new mobo, especially if I wanted to try Crossfire.  (The way things are going money-wise I may not be able to go with a second 2900XT like I wanted to.)  All I know is that I was interested in getting a Quad, but after the research I found this board would not be able to push it as far as it could go, so that meant my only option was getting a better CPU with a higher multi.  And by going with the new G0 CPU's, I would be able to run it cooler as opposed to an older E6600/6700.

The bad part is yesterday a guy offered me an E6700 for $190


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 21, 2007)

t_ski said:


> It's all just a matter of I hadm $200 to spend on this.  I could in no way afford a new CPU and a new mobo, especially if I wanted to try Crossfire.  (The way things are going money-wise I may not be able to go with a second 2900XT like I wanted to.)  All I know is that I was interested in getting a Quad, but after the research I found this board would not be able to push it as far as it could go, so that meant my only option was getting a better CPU with a higher multi.  And by going with the new G0 CPU's, I would be able to run it cooler as opposed to an older E6600/6700.
> 
> The bad part is yesterday a guy offered me an E6700 for $190



no matter, e6850 was still worth the extra $30 or so


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 21, 2007)

tigger69 said:


> this is the board im getting to replace my p5b-dlx-->http://www.tekheads.co.uk/s/product?product=607890
> 
> you guys reckon the 6750 will do ok in it?



just noticed you posted this, I'll let you know what the premium is like bro, though for you (unless you're expecting to go quad before long) I'd recommend just going with a P965 counterpart that performs just as well if not better with duos for a lower price, the P35s are great but mainly just necessary for pushing quads to the limit


----------



## t_ski (Sep 21, 2007)

nflesher87 said:


> no matter, e6850 was still worth the extra $30 or so



Yeah, I figured between the extra multi it might be too high, making me run it at 360 FSB or a 9x multi, which is kind of a waste.

For me the reduced heat output is definitely worth the extra $30.


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 21, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> I suppose the bottom line is....in genuine multi-threadded apps, as opposed to just dual core optimised (3D Mark 2006 for instance) the Quad is always going to be in front and is a good solid bet but at the moment, for games for instance (almost every game) a fast dual core is enough and if that duellie can push out more Mhz than the Quad all well and good, but the REAL day of the quad is getting closer and closer, just not quite enuff support out there just yet but even in gaming, DX10 and onwards may well even change the way we play games and Quads could well be the answer.



Well stated,..and when the REAL day IS here,...the Q6600 or Q7800 or whatever will be the answer AND be less expensive.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Sep 21, 2007)

@nflesher87,i am selling my old 6300 and the p5b-dlx so a mate can upgrade,i will be going quad before long,so it is a better board for when i upgrade to a quad chip.it does look like a nice board,my p5b-dlx has been nothing short of excellent,high fsb reliably.i'm looking forward to seeing what the p35 chipset can do.if it is anything like the p965 it will be interesting.


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 21, 2007)

tigger69 said:


> @nflesher87,i am selling my old 6300 and the p5b-dlx so a mate can upgrade,i will be going quad before long,so it is a better board for when i upgrade to a quad chip.it does look like a nice board,my p5b-dlx has been nothing short of excellent,high fsb reliably.i'm looking forward to seeing what the p35 chipset can do.if it is anything like the p965 it will be interesting.



well I just got my P5K premium in today from newegg open box yet basically all the goodies! I was pumped I really lucked out!
not sure how soon I'll be able to get everything running though as for some reason the Lian-Li case hasn't shown up yet...


----------



## BTK (Sep 23, 2007)

my e6750 is this 100% stable

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=245878

1.39 vcore load cuz of vddroop but 1.418 in bios

around 45c load

15 hours orthos
4 hours memtest86
super pi mod 16k to 32mb 

gaming stable


----------



## DOM (Sep 23, 2007)

BTK said:


> my e6750 is this 100% stable
> 
> http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=245878
> 
> ...





keakar said:


> read this from toms and it might help you decide: http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/17/sbm_low_cost_system/





t_ski said:


> nah, it's a done deal.  E6850 is on it's way.


try to look at the whole thread not the 1st post


----------



## t_ski (Sep 24, 2007)

Got the chip yesterday.  Due to my working hard to bring yout TPU readers new content, the chip will have to wait a few days until it gets installed.  Hopefully Tuesday or Wednesday fo sho


----------



## niko084 (Sep 24, 2007)

I would say the e6750 is the bang for the buck chip right now.
I just got one a few days ago, clocks to 3.4 without any trouble, runs nice and cold, rock solid stable.


----------



## t_ski (Sep 24, 2007)

Sorry, this is a done deal.  I already picked up the E6850 and am hoping to install it tomorrow.


----------



## niko084 (Sep 24, 2007)

t_ski said:


> Sorry, this is a done deal.  I already picked up the E6850 and am hoping to install it tomorrow.



I know that already... Just saying because other people were still talking about the e6750..


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 24, 2007)

Gotta say the 6850 is an amazing chip, it still surprises me, less importantly it will go to 4.2Gig on air but to really give an idea of how it compares to say the E6600.....both with the 9x multi..........with my old 6600 (that would do 3.9Gig), at 3.5Gig it took 1.425V, this 6850 of mine at 1.425V does 3.8Gig comfy, on 1.45V I can get 3.9Gig, it took me 1.575V to get that on the 6600 and at 3.9Gig (my 24/7 speeds) she idles at 28C and never above 45C at full load......now thats some chip!


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 24, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> Gotta say the 6850 is an amazing chip, it still surprises me, less importantly it will go to 4.2Gig on air but to really give an idea of how it compares to say the E6600.....both with the 9x multi..........with my old 6600 (that would do 3.9Gig), at 3.5Gig it took 1.425V, this 6850 of mine at 1.425V does 3.8Gig comfy, on 1.45V I can get 3.9Gig, it took me 1.575V to get that on the 6600 and at 3.9Gig (my 24/7 speeds) she idles at 28C and never above 45C at full load......now thats some chip!



Hey Tatty,..I just opened the mail box to see my E6850 , and project upgrade is now in full swing!
But I still need a mobo
I called eVGA again and the new board they will have after the first of the year will be non-sli so , I think I will be going with the eVGA 680i A1 revision.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 25, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> Hey Tatty,..I just opened the mail box to see my E6850 , and project upgrade is now in full swing!
> But I still need a mobo
> I called eVGA again and the new board they will have after the first of the year will be non-sli so , I think I will be going with the eVGA 680i A1 revision.



Nice board but I gotta say, for a budget price, not much will beat this board of mine for overclocking performance and of course you get the SLi, the downside is that it's not very good with Quads so not particularily future proof but hey.....at around half the price of a 680....who cares!


----------



## trt740 (Sep 25, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> Hey Tatty,..I just opened the mail box to see my E6850 , and project upgrade is now in full swing!
> But I still need a mobo
> I called eVGA again and the new board they will have after the first of the year will be non-sli so , I think I will be going with the eVGA 680i A1 revision.



Well if you want a T1 which is exactly the same physically as a A1 except the A1 has a lifetime warranty and the T1 has a 3 year let me know I'm selling one for 175.00 shipped. I rmaed my orginal and they are sending a brand spanking new one. It will come in it's  original box wilth all the cables still in plastic. Had trouble with the first one so I bought a p35 board. I also picked up a E6850 for 244.00 shipped


----------



## trt740 (Sep 25, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> Nice board but I gotta say, for a budget price, not much will beat this board of mine for overclocking performance and of course you get the SLi, the downside is that it's not very good with Quads so not particularily future proof but hey.....at around half the price of a 680....who cares!




No not true Tatty the Evga NF68 680I A1s and T1 boards are new revisions designed to overclock quads. My board Oced my quad B3 to 3.7ghz but because it was a B3 after about 12 minutes it would error from heat but with a Go the new Evga board will do 3.6 to 3.9 or higher with quads. The original AR/TR board were flawed and wouldn't oc a Quad past 1333 fsb but my T1 did Fsb of 1650 and booted. 

OOPs reread your post Tatty you ment 650 chips and your right they are similar to AR/TR 680I board they oc the hell out of duals but not quads.


----------



## trt740 (Sep 25, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> Well my best offer{219} was accepted from Ebay and a new E6850 is on it's way!!
> Time to sell my MB,RAM and CPU.




great price


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 25, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Well if you want a T1 which is exactly the same physically as a A1 except the A1 has a lifetime warranty and the T1 has a 3 year let me know I'm selling one for 175.00 shipped. I rmaed my orginal and they are sending a brand spanking new one. It will come in it's  original box wilth all the cables still in plastic. Had trouble with the first one so I bought a p35 board. I also picked up a E6850 for 244.00 shipped



The ONLY difference between the 2 is the warranty?Are you sure about this?
I am a noob to Intel/Nvidia so I just want to be sure I can go quad in a year or so with no problems.


----------



## trt740 (Sep 25, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> The ONLY difference between the 2 is the warranty?Are you sure about this?
> I am a noob to Intel/Nvidia so I just want to be sure I can go quad in a year or so with no problems.



I'm 100 percent sure thats per evga they upgraded me from a 680I TR/AR because of bad advertisement and a flaw in the motherboard because like tattys 650 it wouldn't overclock a quad higher than a 1333fsb or 3.0 if your lucky. I was told I was getting a A1 board but recieved a T1 .I called EVGA and they said the reason I got a T1 was because my TR only had a 3 year warranty and a A1 lifetime so they gave me a T1 which also has a 3 year warranty. They then told me physically the T1 and A1 are indentical they only difference is warranty. However, the NF68 680I T1 and A1 are physically different from the old NF68 TR/AR .The T1 and A1 are newer revision specifically designed by nvida to overclock quad (they have a better more stable power system). Hope that clears it up.

Here is my quad B3 stepping running at 3.250ghz  and 3.375 ghz at Fsb of up to 1500 in this thread. It would boot at 3.7 but because of the heat wouldn't bench. If it was a G0 it would have been stable on air at atleast 3.6ghz I betting.  http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=25995&page=63


----------



## SK-1 (Sep 25, 2007)

trt740 said:


> I'm 100 percent sure thats per evga they upgraded me from a 680I TR/AR because of bad advertisement and a flaw in the motherboard because like tattys 650 it wouldn't overclock a quad higher than a 1333fsb or 3.0 if your lucky. I was told I was getting a A1 board but recieved a T1 .I called EVGA and they said the reason I got a T1 was because my TR only had a 3 year warranty and a A1 lifetime so they gave me a T1 which also has a 3 year warranty. They then told me physically the T1 and A1 are indentical they only difference is warranty. However, the NF68 680I T1 and A1 are physically different from the old NF68 TR/AR .The T1 and A1 are newer revision specifically designed by nvida to overclock quad (they have a better more stable power system). Hope that clears it up.
> 
> Here is my quad B3 stepping running at 3.250ghz  and 3.375 ghz at Fsb of up to 1500 in this thread. It would boot at 3.7 but because of the heat wouldn't bench. If it was a G0 it would have been stable on air at atleast 3.6ghz I betting.  http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=25995&page=63




Well then,I will take that T1 off your hands for 175.00.How do you want to handle the transaction? 
Do you do the Pay PAL thing?


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 25, 2007)

trt740 said:


> No not true Tatty the Evga NF68 680I A1s and T1 boards are new revisions designed to overclock quads. My board Oced my quad B3 to 3.7ghz but because it was a B3 after about 12 minutes it would error from heat but with a Go the new Evga board will do 3.6 to 3.9 or higher with quads. The original AR/TR board were flawed and wouldn't oc a Quad past 1333 fsb but my T1 did Fsb of 1650 and booted.
> 
> OOPs reread your post Tatty you ment 650 chips and your right they are similar to AR/TR 680I board they oc the hell out of duals but not quads.



Ahhhh you can read then   Jusat dont see the point in spending all that money to overclock a dual core when mine is just over half the price and a better overclocker!!!!


----------



## trt740 (Sep 25, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> Well then,I will take that T1 off your hands for 175.00.How do you want to handle the transaction?
> Do you do the Pay PAL thing?



PM sent


----------



## t_ski (Sep 26, 2007)

I finally go around to putting my new e6850 in today.  Before, I made sure to check the asus website to see if the mobo was compatible with this CPU.  The asus site said it was as of BIOS rev 2103.  I knew I was running 2206, so I figured it would be OK.

I installed the CPU and tried to boot.  The system starts but does not post.  I figured I should just clear the CMOS and it should be ok. However, it still won't post.  I went back to the asus site and checked again - yes, the mobo is compatible with bios rev 2103.  I follow the link they give and it takes me to BIOS rev 2301, not 2103.

So I put the old e6400 back in and it won't boot.  I tried to flash the BIOS from the USB, a CD-r with the BIOS file on it and a floppy, all with the file named p5wdh.rom as instructed in the manual.  None of the devices are even being accessed 

Please help


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 26, 2007)

yikes what a nightmare
did you bother trying to reset the BIOS via CMOS jumper?


----------



## t_ski (Sep 26, 2007)

Several times


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 26, 2007)

So you are using your old mobo?


----------



## t_ski (Sep 27, 2007)

I was on the lappy, but now I'm back 

I got it straightened out.  It probably was not letting the CMOS clear long enough, although I have not had that issue previously on this board.  I ended up ripping everything out of the case, put the board on a techstation and hooked up a different PSU and vid card (the ones from the DFI rig) and used the stock HSF and no drives.  While I was taking everything out I set the CMOS to clear and removed the battery.  This time around it got a good long clear, and I was able to post.  I powered down and hooked up a floppy, then used the EZ Flash in the BIOS to update to the 2301.  Shut it down, cleared the CMOS while I ate dinner, then powered up and checked everything out.  I installed the new CPU and rebooted half a dozen times getting everything set up in the BIOS again.  Fortunately, everything seems to be working great.  I've had to dumb down the ram settings (was @ ddr800, now 667) due to the higher stock FSB, but I'll get it back up to speed as soon as I try to do some OCing.

Thanks for the input guys, and sorry for freaking out on ya


----------



## t_ski (Sep 27, 2007)

Idling right now at stock @ 18C


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 27, 2007)

t_ski said:


> Idling right now at stock @ 18C





update your system specs


----------



## t_ski (Sep 27, 2007)

I will.  Had to put the kids to bed and stuff.  BTW, that 18C is on the stock HSF


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 27, 2007)

t_ski said:


> I will.  Had to put the kids to bed and stuff.  BTW, that 18C is on the stock HSF



that's awesome bro, you're hookin it up to water thought right?


----------



## t_ski (Sep 27, 2007)

I will be, but not yet.  I need to start out from the bottom and do testing so I can build a base off which I can give you guys review numbers


----------



## nflesher87 (Sep 27, 2007)

t_ski said:


> I will be, but not yet.  I need to start out from the bottom and do testing so I can build a base off which I can give you guys review numbers



o0o0o0o coolio forgot all about that, well good luck with all that and have fun!


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 27, 2007)

Nice going.....apply your seat belts....cause she's gonna fly!!!!


----------



## t_ski (Oct 16, 2007)

I think I might have figured out part of the BIOS flashing issue.  I recently started working on the OC, and ran into another bit of trouble where it would not boot.  Finally tracked it down, and the culprit was the modular 12v cable off the PSU.  Seems it got unplugged enough to not make contact.  Putting the whole system together outside the case made it work, but it went back in and wouldn't boot again.  Finally noticed that the connector was out just a little too much, pushed it in and voila - boot.

At least I know now what I'll be checking the first thing when it doesn't post...


----------



## t_ski (Oct 25, 2007)

Mussels said:


> oh and the cache doesnt matter much at all, the real performance hit is due to the FSB/memory clocks, so after OC'ing theres barely any difference between an allendale and a conroe (i've owned a few, and it was barely 1s superpi difference (14s to roughly 15s) at the same clocks (cant remember now, around 3.5G)



Just found this link:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/24/does_cache_size_matter/index.html

Shows cache size does make some difference in real-world applications.


----------



## Tatty_One (Oct 25, 2007)

t_ski said:


> Just found this link:
> 
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/24/does_cache_size_matter/index.html
> 
> Shows cache size does make some difference in real-world applications.



It ceretainly does!  A HUGE difference in some applications, and TBH, one seconds difference in SuperPI can be equal to 150Mhz in CPU speed.


----------



## newconroer (Oct 25, 2007)

As for why the 6600 still cost more, not sure, maybe because they sold so well in the past and are now synonymous as some flagship chip for the average consumer?

Personally I've had better experience with them vs the 67, 68 and any of the Qs. I've OCd easier, farther and more stable on B2 revisions 6600s. But, you look at Tatty's adventure's and he's had it the other way around. That's just how computing hardware is. 

I don't see anything on the market right now that makes my jaw drop and inspires me to rip apart my intricate builds. I seriously cannot be bothered to tear down everything just to pull the chip and replace it with one that will give me another two to three hundred mhz, so I can sit there and say I picked up a higher 3dmark score. 

The chip is not the all end component. Like any machine(computer or not), high performance parts only work well when coupled with other high performance parts. Some people seem to overlook that.

But, I am curious to see what Ski settles on for his RAM frequency, given that he's going to push a higher FSB now.


----------



## tkpenalty (Oct 25, 2007)

Synthetic benchmakrs arent everything... its funny yet a sad sight to see people basing everything, the value, the glory of the product, on just synthetic benchmarks. Be more practical, a processor is designed not to only calculate super PI or make 3D Marks run faster!


----------



## Tatty_One (Oct 25, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> Synthetic benchmakrs arent everything... its funny yet a sad sight to see people basing everything, the value, the glory of the product, on just synthetic benchmarks. Be more practical, a processor is designed not to only calculate super PI or make 3D Marks run faster!



Agreed!


----------



## t_ski (Oct 25, 2007)

newconroer said:


> But, I am curious to see what Ski settles on for his RAM frequency, given that he's going to push a higher FSB now.



When I run the CPU at stock (which is most of the time right now) the memory runs at 667/PC2-5300 due to the dividers in the BIOS.  The next step up is 834 (IIRC), which OC's the ram, and I haven't had a chance to tweak it up any.  When I OC the CPU to 3.6 GHz, I run the ram at 800/PC2-6400.

Off topic:  Do you like your EK blocks?  Any downsides to them?


----------



## nhlrocker (Oct 25, 2007)

Yes, the E6750 is a GREAT cpu! 
Thats basically all i have to say... nothing more to say.
dont bother getting the quad.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Oct 25, 2007)

My p5k-prem has wi/fi too,i dont use it either.I just figured if i need it in the future,its there without cramming anothe pci card in,and you can use it as a ap which is kinda cool.


----------



## trt740 (Oct 26, 2007)

nhlrocker said:


> Yes, the E6750 is a GREAT cpu!
> Thats basically all i have to say... nothing more to say.
> dont bother getting the quad.



I have a Q6600 go and your crazy It alot faster than a e6750 or e6850. still a e6750 is a very good chip for the money, but a Q6600 G) is a mutch faster chip, and a e6850 is a total monster and in somethings can be faster than a Q6600 but for the same price the Q6600 GO is a better choice, a B3 Q6600 is not better.


----------



## t_ski (Oct 26, 2007)

But you have a P35 mobo which OCs a Q6600 well.  If you had a 975x board that doesn't do well with Quads, then you'd be out of luck in the OC department.

However, once again, I'd like to remind everyone that the CPU has been purchased and installed _for nearly a month now!_


----------



## Tatty_One (Oct 26, 2007)

trt740 said:


> I have a Q6600 go and your crazy It alot faster than a e6750 or e6850. still a e6750 is a very good chip for the money, but a Q6600 G) is a mutch faster chip, and a e6850 is a total monster and in somethings can be faster than a Q6600 but for the same price the Q6600 GO is a better choice, a B3 Q6600 is not better.



He was just saying it is a great chip....not the best chip   His views on the Quad are a little confusing, am willing to bet if I offered most people the choice of a free 6750 or free Q6600 G0,  then I can guess which most would go for!


----------



## bcracer220 (Nov 18, 2007)

my e6750 is excellent, does 3.6 with 1.36 volts orthos stable all day long. although i think i am one of the lucky ones =D get the e6750!


----------



## nflesher87 (Nov 18, 2007)

lol he ended up getting an e6850 and that was like 3 weeks ago


----------



## Spunky (Nov 18, 2007)

The entire Intel C2D line are great overclockers.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 21, 2007)

Hmm, yes the toms link does show improvements from the larger cache. I'll give it that... and the reason i said superpi was because thast all i had time to compare them with  i went through a lot of core 2 CPU's in a month or two, choosing the best OC ones.

I guess it comes down to budget, for most people i'd say a 2.4Ghz allendale for $180 is better than a $400 3GHz, because you can OC the allie to 3GHz and spend the other $220 on a bigger video card


----------



## imperialreign (Nov 21, 2007)

> But you have a P35 mobo which OCs a Q6600 well. If you had a 975x board that doesn't do well with Quads, then you'd be out of luck in the OC department.
> 
> However, once again, I'd like to remind everyone that the CPU has been purchased and installed for nearly a month now!



This thread has been quite informative for me, seeing as how I'm planning on moving up to a Q6850 within the next 6 months, and I have the same mobo.

Excellent mobo, IMO - I've taken my current P4 quite far on just air cooling (4485 MHz), but that x23 multiplier does me in early   But the flexibility, even with a locked multiplier, has been wonderful in that regard.



> Synthetic benchmakrs arent everything... its funny yet a sad sight to see people basing everything, the value, the glory of the product, on just synthetic benchmarks. Be more practical, a processor is designed not to only calculate super PI or make 3D Marks run faster!



agreed here, also!  TBH, the best porgram I've found for system stability and CPU accuracy is F@H client.  If the system crashes out or BSoDs running that, there are very small, minute innacuraccies in the CPUs calculations - it might not be a problem in a different program, but you never know when a small error can turn into a bigger problem.


----------

