Since you're getting a good deal on the i7 2600, just buy it and think about the rest (case, etc..) later. Bottom line is you can have the system up and running and immediately in use for the short term without a case.
Starting from scratch, I would personally only build on that X58 if you can get a cpu for it for dirt cheap, like $100. Otherwise, I'd be more compelled to sell off the board and build on SB.
+1
I used to always remove the push pins on the stock coolers or any other aftermarket coolers that came with them (I know, why did they include them in aftermarket coolers?). Just as Zap describes it, it's a very simple process to remove them, do-able with just about anything like a thin...
For gaming, no. That quad at 3.6ghz will hold pretty well at higher resolutions with current videocards. You could probably even skip Sandy Bridge and go for Haswell.
If you can get 3.4-3.6ghz overclock on that cpu it should be fine for higher resolution gaming. That being said, you should be able to get a high percentage of gtx 580's potential.
Newer Fermi's are probably just able to run at lower VID for default clocks which result in lower power usage and temps. I wouldn't be surprised at all in this case.
From my experience with the OCCT gpu stress test, if I can pass it with low amounts of artifacts, it won't ever crash in games and can fold an entire day without errors. Furmark, 3dmark Vantage, EVGA OC scanner, and MSI Kombustor doesn't test stability very well as I've had overclocks that were...
Once both are overclocked, there's barely any difference between the 2 so I would say definitely not worth the effort. The e6400 can also do virtualization while I think e5200's are stripped of that feature. If you were to upgrade, a quad core would be the way to go, but seeing the motherboard...
If you're thinking of building something that you'll keep for a while, Sandy Bridge should be available in January for around the same price as the lynnfield processor you picked out. It's pretty much the end for lga 1156 as they won't be making anything for that anymore once things shift over...
Power off psu and unplug cord, then take out that cmos battery and jumper the board to clear cmos for like 10-15 mins and try again. See if it'll power on then.
From my understanding is, BD will fit in the current AM3 sockets by pin, but they won't work on them. Maybe it has something to do with feeding the chip with enough power.
I've been thinking of getting a cheap i5 750 or i7 920 setup for cheap, but since sandy bridge is around the corner, and with the leaked price list, it seems like it's much better to wait for that instead. I wonder how much people can get for their i5 or i7's once sandy bridge releases.
A lot of unstable clocks can run fine through furmark, kombustor, and even a lot of games. Try OCCT and run the GPU Stress Test with shader complexity 8 at full screen native resolution. Lets see how long your overclocked cards lasts through that artifact free.
Not exactly a 470, but take a look at this and just extrapolate the results to get rough 470 results:
http://www.overclock.net/nvidia/800329-gtx460-1gb-vs-gtx465-review.html
74C is nothing to worry about. If you're passing occt at shader complexity 8, full screen, at highest resolution you can handle, it should be a lot more stable than furmark or any other program out there will indicate.
Looks good, but as long as having that extra videocard for dedicated physx won't be a significant power drain, all the better. Or is it actually power intensive?
Try a few things (if you haven't already):
1) Try the other dual channel slots.
2) Unplug all power to comp, take out motherboard battery, reset CMOS
3) Boot with 1 stick of ram, then set manual voltages for memory (or even a bit over spec)
4) Adjust memory timings manually
5) Increase...
Thanks, from that last one, it seems to me that in most cases a 470 requires ~15% bump in core clocks to match a 480 in performance. So I'm assuming ~15% performance difference between the two clock for clock.
I've been able to find 1 review (though an older one) that comes close to clock for clock gtx 470 @725 vs gtx 480 stock, and the 480 performance advantage ranged from ~15%all the way up to ~25% in certain cases at 1920x1200. Why such a large variation? Looking at the shader and texture...
I know someone that does that ps3 + dell u2410 all the time and it goes great on it. Nothing to worry bout here, if that's the monitor you're eyeing, go for it.
I agree with the others that it's almost certain that it's the motherboard that's dead and if you can buy a cheap motherboard to replace it, it'd be far better than upgrading at this point in time. Once you do get a new motherboard though, have your e6400 overclocked and it should hold you over...
I remember there was some sorta command you can use that pretty much unloads all the drivers etc in windows back to clean slate. I did that when I made a motherboard swap a few years back. That should have the same effect.
Wouldn't a 5850 still perform better than a 470 when comparing average overclocks for both cards? 5850's around 1ghz+ should be pretty tough for a 470 to parallel on air, no?
I vote for 5450 as well, unless there's other cheaper cards available that will give you hardware acceleration for your videos and perhaps if you require, be able to pass audio over hdmi. Just go for the cheapest card you can find!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.