>>> P4 2.0A C1 <<<

[oldfart]

I run a Ti4600 and am still happy with it, but.....my buddy has a 9700 Pro. YEOW. That thing is nice. He plays pretty much all the same games I do and is a big time BF1942 fanatic. He can crank up the FSAA and anisotropic filtering on it and it is still smooth as butter and looks incredible. My 4600 is an unplayable slide show if I do the same. He doesn't have any problems with any games on it. It certainly is FAR from "riddled with problems". I can't understand some of the brand loyalty that goes on around here. I'll take whatever is best. Right now, it's ATi. That is pretty well undisputed. Six months from now, that may well change again.

Anyway, sorry for digressing. Lets get back to the overclocking discussion.

 

[Toymaker]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
besides listening to mp3s and chatting here, i really havent had much of a chance to use it yet.
it feels just as fast as my 2.26b (which is a compliment concidering the 2.26b was @ 167fsb 334ddr)
my temps are pretty much the same if not better on the 2.0A.
its been too easy so far, not giving me much to really talk about

the 2.0A is a nice deal if you can find them cheap.
a 1.14ghz 57% OC aint too shabby

57% OC and 3.2 Ghz at 1.68 Vcore for $155.00. I can live with that.

 

[dfish]

Thugs:

I'm trying to pick up a C-1 from my p4g8x, and can't help but notice you used a 2.0. Congrats, BTW, on getting a C-1 version of one. I'm kinda probing why you used this chip, and why so many seek the 2.4 C-1. Below is a subset of a question I'd places in another thread, that's on point, so I didn't start another one. Do you mind giving me your thoughts as well?

Thanks.

dan

1) I think I've been told all 2.66's are C-1's. Is this correct?

2) Are B0's being phased out, or are slower clocked C-1's chips (1.8's - 2.4's) those that didn't make the 2.66 cut and so got derated?

3) Why the focus on the 2.4? I agree it's the sweet spot price wise, but hell, after buying the twinaxe memory, paying out the nose for a p4g8x, why get cheap now? I guess I'm wondering:

a. How high can we clock a cpu before we run the FSB/memory bus out of bandwidth. Whataver point that is, it's clearly that point when I'd want to stop looking for more CPU mhz and begin focusing only on FSB increases (that bring sych's increases in cpu mhz with memory).

b. Until that point, I'd think buying cpu to be a reasonable option.

4. I wondering, perhaps using false logic, perhaps not, if a 2.66, that is, a chip that's always shipped as a C-1, has a better chance of being the hidden jewel that goes to the big numbers?

 

[human2k]

Originally posted by: LastRide
Thugs is an Nvidia man.He will never buy an ATI..LOL

I wonder if thugz was one of the few who cleared out newegg's stock of 12 FX cards in 17min.

 

[THUGSROOK]

you are looking into this stuff way too much and your confusing yourself (and perhaps others too)

1) i think so ~ i dont pay attention to 2.66 cpus much

2) B0 / C1 are model numbers ~ new models have higher numbers (same with the scodes) so of course B0 is gonna be phased out
D1 stepping will be next

3) intel put out a nice batch 2.4b ~ and thats all there is to it!
"cheap" will depend on your income

a) as high as you can ~ the performance curve doesnt fall off even as high as 225fsb

4) the hidden jewel is the chip that gets the most for the least ~ right now that would be a 1.8A.

 

[dfish]

Thanks Thugs. I'll try not to post too many questions. I'm a network/com. analyst, so its habit. I guess I was trying to avoid the dreaded "ready", "fire", "aim" syndrom.

Re:

1; continued search's everywhere I can think shows no "no's", so.....

2; I'd assumed it possible intel was holding B0' steps for the lower clock rates till they phased them out. If so, it would have implied a lower rate C-1 was there for a reason. I think you're telling me that's wrong and intel will be phasing over to C-1 for all, then D's then, etc. Ah well, I learned something anyway

3a. I phrased it badly. I wondered if there's a wall when CPU mhz has lesser return without a corresponding memory increase. As in does a 2.66 on a 133 fsb run as much faster then a 2.4 as the basic math suggests, or does memory bandwidth hold it back (both on a 133 FSB bus). I asked you because I figured you'd long since looked into it. I do think THG has done some looking into this, I just wanted real world input.


Thanks again!

 

[JSSheridan]

I can answer that 3rd question for you. The Pentium 4 FSB can deliver 4.2GB/s of bandwidth. According to some numbers I got from Sohcan, the Pentium 4's performance would scale with frequency increases up until about 3.4GHz. I came to this by learning from Sohcan that the Pentium 4 Northwood needs 1.25GB/s of bandwidth for every 1GHz of speed, and since the maximum is 4.2GB/s, 4.2 divided by 1.25 gives 3.4GHz. On the other hand, if you were to increase the bandwidth above 4.2GB/s without increasing the speed, then you wouldn't see much performance difference. Peace.

 

[dfish]

Very nice!

Thanks for the tip. It appears that memory and the gods willing, a 2.66 should have no different overclock expectation (other then sheer luck of the draw) then a 2.4 C-1.

 

[fl62]

Thugs - Nice to see you got my old 2.0A C1 so far Now you've got me thinking I should have kept it....... But alas, My new 2.4B C1 SL6RZ just arrived, now i'm just waiting on the P4G8X to arrive

 

[THUGSROOK]

fl62 ~ wanna buy it back?

...its for sale in the fs/ft forum

 

[Mikki]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
fl62 ~ wanna buy it back?

...its for sale in the fs/ft forum

If it's for sale that means you have something to replace it with...:Q

 

[THUGSROOK]

errrr ~ not really

waiting on one tho.........

 

[THUGSROOK]

Originally posted by: dbwillis
Looks like another winner Im betting 162, what do we win, your 2.26?

Mikki was the 1st person to guess 150fsb, so he won my 2.26b @ 167fsb.

congrats

 

[THUGSROOK]

cleaned up the thread a little bit to make it less confusing

20/20 hindsight is the best editor

 

[THUGSROOK]

 

[Jgtdragon]

Sweet chip.

 

[THUGSROOK]

Originally posted by: jhites
Outstanding Thugs.....

I still can't figure where those unbuffered scores are coming from
I have mine at 178fsb timing 2-2-2-6 1T
and still only get 2085 / 2106

my new XMS3200LL produces the same scores as my XMS3000 ~ so id say it is Win98.
179fsb timing 2-2-2-6 1T (2.5v) = 2423 / 2499

IMHO: dont worry about it, sandra is worthless

 

[LukFilm]

I had a chip like that, but much better. Did 3.0GHz at default voltage. Sold for $150... :brokenheart:

 

[THUGSROOK]

Luk ~ this was one of your chips (they get around)

 

[LastRide]

hehe,

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
Luk ~ this was one of your chips (they get around)

 

[LukFilm]

Originally posted by: LastRide
hehe,

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
Luk ~ this was one of your chips (they get around)

:Q LOL