Wowoweeeewow! 4 time as much porn as before, you haven't built a gaming rig we know you too well.. its a masturbation station!

Did you go for the Q9450????

Yep.. Q9450, a DFI Lanparty LT X48 motherboard (very very much overkill for me) and 4gig of DDR2

ive put my raptors back as stripes for the os... its rather speedy

Those quads don't half shift :thumbup:

Interestingly I saw something that said overclocked Q6600's were actually better performers than most of the Yorkfields.

Interestingly I saw something that said overclocked Q6600's were actually better performers than most of the Yorkfields.

Its all relative.. the Q6600 are a good overclocker, and have a 9x multi compared to my 8x. however clock for clock the Yorkfields are faster because of the extra cache, and lower voltage. - and i didnt have to tweak anything. Trying to get Loz's Q6600 past 3gig wasnt this easy.

Some of the other 45nm dualcore chips are good for over 5gig on phase-change.. and just over 4 on decent air cooling.

Overclocking my friends Q6600 with his striker was a bitch of a job. But thats down to the board.

The big cache however means higher cost due to more failures in manufacture.

That plus it is usually the cache that reduces overclocking ability, so i think a "your mileage may vary" becomes more important the more SRAM they stick in the chip.

The big cache however means higher cost due to more failures in manufacture.

That plus it is usually the cache that reduces overclocking ability, so i think a "your mileage may vary" becomes more important the more SRAM they stick in the chip.

Cheezy.. i love you! But half the time i aint got a feckin clue what your on about lol! :P

Cheezy.. i love you! But half the time i aint got a feckin clue what your on about lol! :P

Erm without being rude mate, that is a known fact in silicon manufacture.

It is what the guys doing ASIC design for me said.

The more memory, the more transistors, the more likely a fault and the more silicon needed per CPU. Hence higher manufacturing cost and so retail cost.

The more transistors the more likely you are to get leakage and other heat issues when pushing them faster. Hence potentially less overclockable.

Oddly enough last time I was at IDF their design guys seemed to say the same thing about the P4 and why core the way forward.

The lack of cache was why the original celeron overclocked so well, but also why is performed quite poorly per clock.

Erm without being rude mate, that is a known fact in silicon manufacture.

It is what the guys doing ASIC design for me said.

The more memory, the more transistors, the more likely a fault and the more silicon needed per CPU. Hence higher manufacturing cost and so retail cost.

The more transistors the more likely you are to get leakage and other heat issues when pushing them faster. Hence potentially less overclockable.

Oddly enough last time I was at IDF their design guys seemed to say the same thing about the P4 and why core the way forward.

The lack of cache was why the original celeron overclocked so well, but also why is performed quite poorly per clock.

Well ain't you a stroppy so and so!! I was being friendly and having a joke about you being very technical and as per usual you take offence and get in a huff and decide to spout a whole load more garbage.

Chill mofos! no need to be gettin jelous over my new rig

I ain't jealous Cheeze says mine overclocks better than yours :P

I ain't jealous Cheeze says mine overclocks better than yours :P

Wait and see young padwan... wait n see

Wait and see young padwan... wait n see

Ooh, is it on............ Are you gonna serve me ???

Ooh, is it on............ Are you gonna serve me ???

Its soooo on :P

get your benchmark results ready boyo

Well ain't you a stroppy so and so!! I was being friendly and having a joke about you being very technical and as per usual you take offence and get in a huff and decide to spout a whole load more garbage.

Ok so I mis-read your post and will apologise for that. Swap your "I" for a "you" and add a tired me and I hope the reply may make a bit of sense.

Anyway, I'm a chilled Mo-Fo in the words of Col.

Will be interesting to see who gets the most workload per £ out of the new rigs they all have

As for being jealous of a Yorkfield Col, I've got about 20 Harpertowns a 10 motherboards and a lot of FB Dimms sitting around

Well, the QX9770 (which is the speed my CPU currently runs at) costs £903 on scan at the moment...

Tell ya what.. this Quadcore cant alf chew thru H264 encoding :eek:

What were you running before?

The last system I had was a dual Xeon DP and that used to munch through it too

Twaz a dual core athlon..

its only really now that cpu intensive apps are becoming multi threaded.

can rip thru an entire dvd in about 40 minutes

40 minutes, that seems like quite a long time as a few years back I was doing a DVD in about 10 minutes when putting my collection on the PC.

What sort of size you ripping to as IIRC mine were about 1GB total to MPEG4.

Im not entirely sure.. not done a full DVD yet.. i shall do a test

Edit.. 20 minutes to encode Finding Nemo fillum into X264

Arctic Cooling unleashes Freezer Xtreme | News | Custom PC

just saw this which may help in the quest for higher speed:)

Arctic Cooling unleashes Freezer Xtreme | News | Custom PC

just saw this which may help in the quest for higher speed:)

Ive got a Thermalright Ultima 90 on the way

Cool (ged it)

What speed you at now then God