Just ordered 5870. Have p35 with celly: i5 vs. Q9550

[Schmide]

OT Every time you reply you screw up all the quotes and i have to rebuild them. :roll:

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
Now you want to strawman? I said something you said something that's not what I said. Far as I'm concerned you put words in my mouth. I tried to explain it to you so you can understand more clearly what I was trying to say. This reply is over far as I'm concerned.

I don't want a straman, in fact what I asked would be completely consistent with my original, If (you believe something) statement. You understand the difference between a if statement and a direct quote?

Edit: but we can do it with direct quotes.

I think I explained to you what strawman is before. Here let me remind you what it is because you seem to be confused what the actual meaning....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

It's not consistent. You specifically said something I didn't say. that was basis of your reply. Then you changed something into how p35 being the exception of reaching 450fsb with yorkfield.

If you look back at our history. I was the one who originally called Straw Man on your arguments when we were discussing the dried up thermal paste on the OP video card. Serious Irony number 8 Edit Here you go.

Originally posted by: Azn
Motherboard will determine the max FSB speed not which processor.

Originally posted by: Schmide
If you believe all chips will reach the same FSB on the same motherboard

I guess i phrased it a bit different, but the implications are the same. Oh well.

When you originally called straw man on my argument, this was what you called it on. I will admit it is not a direct quote, but that is why I phrased it in the form of a inequality. It is asking for clarification on your position, as was the p35 fsb question. I am not trying to mis-represent anything you say and this definitely can't be done with such a statement. All this mumbo jumbo can be cleared up with a simple direct question. I'm not trying to misrepresent your stance either. So straight forward.

Do you believe that the FSB overclocking of a quad is equal to a dualy?

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
Perhaps you missed it. In my other link it has 2 examples of 2 different p35 boards doing 450fsb with Q9450.

Yeah I see 2 in the table now. Ehh. I still consider it the exception not the norm.

Can you prove this is the exception? How about the other link I gave you? I suppose those are more exceptions. :laugh:

Even better. Here is a thread discussing the exact same board and the FSB limitations with quads.

overclock.net

A really good pro board with a p35 chipset and high end quad can reach the mid 400s with the right settings. No one here said is was impossible.

The reality is p35s were gone and forgotten by the time q9xxx quads became the norm. There were sure some gem p35s that could do mid 400s. I don't believe the OP motherboard is one of them. Maybe it is. Either way. I'm going to let it rest.

(original)

So now a good p35 board can do mid 400fsb? Whatever happened to your 400fsb p35 limit with yorkfield claims? :disgust:

(edited?)

So now a good p35 board can do mid 400fsb? Whatever happened to your 400fsb p35 limit with yorkfield claims which you agreed with the people on this thread? Ignorance finally crumbling I see. This isn't the first time I made you see the light and it won't be the last.

Originally posted by: Schmide
I had an 8200 that could barely do 400fsb on a 650i or a p35.

It was a corporal observation.

(sarcasm) I guess I was mistaken when I tried to make it happen. No maybe I was too ignorant? (/sarcasm)

My stance is. A p35 with a quad will do around 400fsb probably in the early teens.

Originally posted by: Schmide
As for the examples. Sure you will find quads doing more than 400fsb on said motherboards. It is more an exception than and a commonality.

I guess if you take this as a hard number. Oh well. I don't think I ever said it was impossible? In fact I gave this disclaimer.

Originally posted by: Schmide
I gave my experience as is. Being in general consensus with everybody sans you, I'll let it stand. I doubt anything would convince you anyways.

and finally a question which you have yet to answer. You don't have to.

Originally posted by: Schmide
Given a p35 and a p45 and a Q9450, will the maximum FSB be the same? Do you consider it the norm for p35s to reach 450+ FSB or the exception?

That is as far as I represented the p35 quad fsb range. It's all on the table, straw man or not. I will add another disclaimer. I in no way wish to represent or attempt to define your stance here. Only you can do that. If you feel I have done so make a clear distinction please.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: BTRY B 529th FA BN
I asked because you twice gave examples to X38 chipsets :laugh:

Twice? It was once. The web page came up when I was looking for p35 boards with yorkfield overclocking which you corrected and I agreed with and said it was my mistake. What was the point of this statement? Are you trying bait me again?

You did provide a link with some good overclocking of a quad on a P35 chipset; I never said impossible, I asked for SSs to validate the chipset but again there is some convincing evidence. Now don't mix up me saying there is a 400fsb limit on a P35 with a quad EDIT: i did say: "it seems you will hit a wall around 425fsb" but never said it as an absolute.

Now why would you be asking me for this SSs to validate the chipset when they aren't my claims. You should be asking the guys who did. I just pointed them out when you said things like there's a FSB limit on p35 boards which seems to be not true.

You say "Tell me what is different about quad vs core 2 duo overclocking... Absolutely nothing! No offense " There is nothing different in doing so as in 'How' to do it - you are right there. It's like a dry sense of humor you are displaying here. That's like if a teacher asked: "Can somebody answer my question?" and you say, "Yes." - How is that helping? You pick apart the OP's questions to do what, teach him a lesson on how to ask questions? If someone is writing some information out that consistently uses some name that is easily accepted by an acronym or some reference to that person or thing, that acronym or reference is accepted in the later parts of the paragraph. Hence the OP's questioning of overclock his quad and then you start talking about stressing your e6300 and how it does 500fsb :roll:

I wasn't even trying to be funny but however you want to perceive is fine by me.

I only mentioned my E6300 doing 500fsb dance because FSB overclocking stress on northbridge not if it's a quad or dual.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Schmide
OT Every time you reply you screw up all the quotes and i have to rebuild them. :roll:

can you stop with quote on quotes? It's really making a mess of the post and quite annoying to reply.

If you look back at our history. I was the one who originally called Straw Man on your arguments when we were discussing the dried up thermal paste on the OP video card. Serious Irony number 8 Edit Here you go.

When you originally called straw man on my argument, this was what you called it on. I will admit it is not a direct quote, but that is why I phrased it in the form of a inequality. It is asking for clarification on your position, as was the p35 fsb question. I am not trying to mis-represent anything you say and this definitely can't be done with such a statement. All this mumbo jumbo can be cleared up with a simple direct question. I'm not trying to misrepresent your stance either. So straight forward.

No you called me a strawman for editing my post. :laugh: You got all riled up like how you always are. You got all bitter because you started replying to my post 10 seconds after my post was posted and got angry I had edited my post and called me a strawman.

Do you believe that the FSB overclocking of a quad is equal to a dualy?

This is the same question you asked earlier which I answered and even gave a clear explanation of what I thought. If you didn't comprehend go back to page 2 and read again.

It was a corporal observation. (sarcasm) I guess I was mistaken when I tried to make it happen. No maybe I was too ignorant? (/sarcasm) My stance is. A p35 with a quad will do around 400fsb probably in the early teens.

Right but the examples I gave you say other wise. You've changed your stance multiple times already. First you said there's limit of 400fsb. After my examples and your research you said a good p35 board will do mid 400fsb which can mean anywhere in the 450fsb range I'm just assuming here. now you changed it to 400fsb and early teens because of comments of your ignorance crumbling..

The fact is it doesn't matter if it's p35 or not. If it doesn't have high power phase design it's not going to overclock high fsb. I think lot of the people who think p35 have this limit had cheaper boards based on 4 or 6 phase power design, crappy ram, bad settings, etc and then ignorantly blame p35 boards where we have this effect here today on anandforums.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
OT Every time you reply you screw up all the quotes and i have to rebuild them. :roll:

can you stop with quote on quotes? It's really making a mess of the post and quite annoying to reply.

My quotes are fine. You're the one who starts new quotes without terminating the old ones and forgets to label who said what. No wonder I may have trouble with what you're saying sometime. I kindly ask that you close them correctly.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
If you look back at our history. I was the one who originally called Straw Man on your arguments when we were discussing the dried up thermal paste on the OP video card. Serious Irony number 8 Edit Here you go.

When you originally called straw man on my argument, this was what you called it on. I will admit it is not a direct quote, but that is why I phrased it in the form of a inequality. It is asking for clarification on your position, as was the p35 fsb question. I am not trying to mis-represent anything you say and this definitely can't be done with such a statement. All this mumbo jumbo can be cleared up with a simple direct question. I'm not trying to misrepresent your stance either. So straight forward.

No you called me a strawman for editing my post. :laugh: You got a riled up like how you always are. You got all bitter because you started replying to my post 10 seconds after my post was posted and got angry I had edited my post and called me a strawman.

I called you a straw man because you kept saying I wasn't talking about a thermal pad and arguing that I said that just changing the material would cause a 10c drop. It was really comical. I suggest everyone go back and read it. I did complain about your edits, but never called that part of the straw man.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
Do you believe that the FSB overclocking of a quad is equal to a dualy?

This is the same question you asked earlier which I answered and even gave a clear explanation of what I thought. If you didn't comprehend go back to page 2 and read again.

Ok back on page 2 with regards to quads. We have

A question?

Originally posted by: Azn
That doesn't make sense to me. So it's different for quads? Wouldn't that stress be on the northbridge not what processor.

Your rant on how great your dualy FSB overclock is.

Originally posted by: Azn
Now you are just baiting/trolling me. You know as hell know I don't have yorkfield and I'm not upgrading yet because I'm satisfied with my setup for now. I could go buy it if you are willing to put a little wager just to make it little interesting.

What is the average overclock of Q9550 on P45 board? It sure as hell isn't 4.5ghz @ 500fsb. My board has been stressed all the way up to 500fsb as my memory is the limit not if it's a quad or dual.

and another question?

Originally posted by: Azn
Yes please do tell. What was your FSB limit before the quad? Do you know?

Your answer to my statement.

Originally posted by: Azn
Nvidia's 650i SLI boards sucks at fsb overclocking compared to intel's official core 2 duo boards I hope you knew that.

Motherboard will determine the max FSB speed not which processor.

and your example.

Originally posted by: Azn

Where are you getting this info from? Who said this?

415x9=3735mhz not 3.4ghz.

edit: Here are some links about the same subject by searching google.

http://forums.overclockers.com...howthread.php?t=659533

2 examples of p35 board that did 450fsb with Q9450.

http://www.overclock.net/attac...1.49vcore_9.953s_1.png

Another here 465fsb on p35 board.


http://episteme.arstechnica.co...7909774/m/117003502931

Seriously it's like pulling teeth. None of this answers the questions I posed. If it does not very clearly or concisely.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
It was a corporal observation. (sarcasm) I guess I was mistaken when I tried to make it happen. No maybe I was too ignorant? (/sarcasm) My stance is. A p35 with a quad will do around 400fsb probably in the early teens.

Right but the examples I gave you say other wise. You've changed your stance multiple times already. First you said there's limit of 400fsb. After my examples and your research you said a good p35 board will do mid 400fsb which can mean anywhere in the 450fsb range I'm just assuming here. now you changed it to 400fsb and early teens... So which is it?

I just gave you a list of everything I put forward. Very clear and very concise. Ironically, straw man, I said I found a limit.

Originally posted by: Schmide
I had an 8200 that could barely do 400fsb on a 650i or a p35.

not that there is a limit. Like you state above. Nice try to cage my argument. My stance is not as rigid as you make it out to be.

You say I get angry and bitter. I think I'm rather calm and supportive. Anywoo. Off to bed see ya tomorrow.


Edit: This is what I said before. If you edit more than just grammar. Put a little edit for us.

Originally posted by: Azn
now you changed it to 400fsb and early teens because of comments of your ignorance crumbling..

The fact is it doesn't matter if it's p35 or not. If it doesn't have high power phase design it's not going to overclock high fsb. I think lot of the people who think p35 have this limit had cheaper boards based on 4 or 6 phase power design, crappy ram, bad settings, etc and then ignorantly blame p35 boards where we have this effect here today on anandforums.

Yes I'm crumbling like all those who ignorantly blame p35 boards. It's an internets conspiracy. So you're really calling me ignorant for taking the position that p35 boards aren't the best overclockers with quads? Really? Really? I guess when a board fails to reach some number blame the user and not the board.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Schmide
My quotes are fine. You're the one who starts new quotes without terminating the old ones and forgets to label who said what. No wonder I may have trouble with what you're saying sometime. I kindly ask that you close them correctly.

I don't care if your quotes are fine. Stop using quote on quotes if you don't want to fix the quotes again. It's just a bitch to track all these Q which I sometimes miss.

I called you a straw man because you kept saying I wasn't talking about a thermal pad and arguing that I said that just changing the material would cause a 10c drop. It was really comical. I suggest everyone go back and read it. I did complain about your edits, but never called that part of the straw man.

That's pretty funny when there's no thermal pad on video cards but rather thermal paste. You claimed how better thermal paste makes 10C drop when the difference of different paste isn't that high of temperature change. Hilarious. I know. Only a bad contact can lead you to 10C temp changes.

I remember in another thread about system power consumption you tried to call me straw man when I had edited my post because you always seem to be all riled up probably bi-polar. You pretty much reply to my posts to troll.

Ok back on page 2 with regards to quads. We have

A question?

OH my bad it was page 3.

not that there is a limit. Like you state above. Nice try to cage my argument. My stance is not as rigid as you make it out to be. You say I get angry and bitter. I think I'm rather calm and supportive. Anywoo. Off to bed see ya tomorrow.

You do get angry and bitter because I give examples and proof that disapprove your claims. Probably waiting for me to reply to this right now as we speak so you can reply with more rhetoric with no examples or proof this p35 having 400 fsb limitation on yorkfield .

Yes I'm crumbling like all those who ignorantly blame p35 boards. It's an internets conspiracy. So you're really calling me ignorant for taking the position that p35 boards aren't the best overclockers with quads? Really? Really? I guess when a board fails to reach some number blame the user and not the board.

You always crumble when facts and examples are are presented upon you and change your stance like you did in this thread how good p35 boards can do mid 450fsb. This wasn't the first time I made you crumble either. I remember in another thread where you had changed your stance like this one.

I just looked up O.P's gigabyte ds3-2 board. Its' based on 6 phase power design which is rather bad for overclocking. Considering there were sleuth of ds3-2 owners here they rather blame p35 boards than themselves for buying a cheap board. Gigabytes p45 board is based on 12 phase power design which cured these nub overclockers only to spread false rumors in this forum.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
My quotes are fine. You're the one who starts new quotes without terminating the old ones and forgets to label who said what. No wonder I may have trouble with what you're saying sometime. I kindly ask that you close them correctly.

I don't care if your quotes are fine. Stop using quote on quotes if you don't want to fix the quotes again. It's just a bitch to track all these Q which I sometimes miss.

All you have to do is close the quote above before you quote below. Not rocket science. With the amount of changing of facts with your edits, I have to over quote you!

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
I called you a straw man because you kept saying I wasn't talking about a thermal pad and arguing that I said that just changing the material would cause a 10c drop. It was really comical. I suggest everyone go back and read it. I did complain about your edits, but never called that part of the straw man.

That's pretty funny when there's no thermal pad on video cards but rather thermal paste. You claimed how better thermal paste makes 10C drop when the difference of different paste isn't that high of temperature change. Hilarious. I know. Only a bad contact can
lead you to 10C temp changes.

I can't get away form it. Exact same skew. Again not what I said. Point is moot.

Originally posted by: Azn
I remember in another thread about system power consumption you tried to call me straw man when I had edited my post because you always seem to be all riled up probably bi-polar. You pretty much reply to my posts to troll.

Nah. PSU VC here No edits. Just another misrepresentation. I stand by what I said and how I said it.

Stop playing troll victim. Irony number 9.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
Ok back on page 2 with regards to quads. We have

A question?

OH my bad it was page 3.

So this

Originally posted by: Azn
Now If I get a Q9550 and this chip can is capable of 500fsb I don't see any reason that my p965 board can't do the 500fsb with that processor.

A fine opinion to have. I would pay serious money to see a q9550 with a 500mhz bus on a p965. You go gurl.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
not that there is a limit. Like you state above. Nice try to cage my argument. My stance is not as rigid as you make it out to be. You say I get angry and bitter. I think I'm rather calm and supportive. Anywoo. Off to bed see ya tomorrow.

You do get angry and bitter because I give examples and proof that disapprove your claims. Probably waiting for me to reply to this right now as we speak so you can reply with more rhetoric with no examples or proof this p35 having 400 fsb limitation on yorkfield .

Not angry not bitter. Very entertained. Guess you missed this above, but you never really reply to what I say, just more attempts to change what I say.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
Yes I'm crumbling like all those who ignorantly blame p35 boards. It's an internets conspiracy. So you're really calling me ignorant for taking the position that p35 boards aren't the best overclockers with quads? Really? Really? I guess when a board fails to reach some number blame the user and not the board.

You always crumble when facts and examples are are presented upon you and change your stance like you did in this thread how good p35 boards can do mid 450fsb. This wasn't the first time I made you crumble either. I remember in another thread where you had changed your stance like this one.

Again you misrepresent me. I rarely talk in absolutes. Yet you read everything I say as a black and white fact. You have to learn the concepts of doable, probable, and not plain likely.

Originally posted by: Azn
I just looked up O.P's gigabyte ds3-2 board. Its' based on 6 phase power design which is rather bad for overclocking. Considering there were sleuth of ds3-2 owners here they rather blame p35 boards than themselves for buying a cheap board. Gigabytes p45 board is based on 12 phase power design which cured these nub overclockers only to spread false rumors in this forum.

Darn nubs. Spread false rumors in this forum.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
Would his P35 based board limit his FSB o/c to only about 400?

I don't think so. I have a original P965 board that is 3 years old when first core 2 duo were released. It does 500fsb no problem.

They should all go out and get 965 motherboards so they can run their 1337 quads at 500mhz fsb.

I hope I'm not misquoting you.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Azn

I just looked up O.P's gigabyte ds3-2 board. Its' based on 6 phase power design which is rather bad for overclocking. Considering there were sleuth of ds3-2 owners here they rather blame p35 boards than themselves for buying a cheap board. Gigabytes p45 board is based on 12 phase power design which cured these nub overclockers only to spread false rumors in this forum.

Gigabyte never made DS3L revision 1 or 2 board with 6-phase power design. Official Website

DS3L owners, including myself, stated specifically that these P35 boards, as well as most P35 boards are not sufficient for P35 425+FSB quad 45nm overclocking. Almost every link you provided only showed Abit IP35-Pro boards being able to accomplish this. You completely changed your argument to attempt to prove that since some # of P35 boards were able to hit high 45nm quad FSBs, then anyone who could not do so is a noob. This is flaws arguments in itself. But regardless, you failed to address OP's main concern regarding his motherboard. Since you've never owned a P35-DS3L board, you obviously don't know anything about its overclocking abilities.

For your information, you can only adjust the northbridge MCH voltage, FSB Termination Voltage and CPU voltage. There are no fancy adjustments such as PLL or Load Line Calibration etc. Your opinion of other overclockers being 'noobs' only highlights your ignorance of not understanding the technical differences and intricacies of the BIOS and Power circuitry/cooling limitations between different P35 motherboards as well the P35 vs. P45 chipset.

Providing a handful of links over the Internet regarding a few users who were able to hit high FSB is hardly relevant when by far the majority of P35 users will never hit those speeds on a Q9550, especially not on the 4-power phase P35-DS3L.

The fact that the OP was never able to get above 415 FSB only strengthened our comments with a real world example. The OP even stated no adjustments to FSB termination voltage, MCH or CPU core voltage would get the board Prime 95 stable. So you must have some "magic" hand then because no amount of voltage increases in the BIOS could get the chip above 415FSB.

Not to mention, not a single CPU-Z screenshot had a P35 chipset as proof.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Schmide
All you have to do is close the quote above before you quote below. Not rocket science. With the amount of changing of facts with your edits, I have to over quote you!

Look I'm going to miss some of the quotes whether you LIKE it or NOT. I've already warned you about it. If you don't want to fix it again I already suggested you stop using quote on quotes. If you don't like it. TOUGH $hit.

Originally posted by: Schmide

That's pretty funny when there's no thermal pad on video cards but rather thermal paste. You claimed how better thermal paste makes 10C drop when the difference of different paste isn't that high of temperature change. Hilarious. I know. Only a bad contact can
lead you to 10C temp changes.

I can't get away form it. Exact same skew. Again not what I said. Point is moot.

I love how you just deny when the first post I made was about the heatsink could be in bad contact and then you replied with NO WAY IT'S THERMAL PASTE MAKES THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE. THEN YOU STARTED CALLING STOCK THERMAL PASTE ON VIDEO CARDS AS THERMAL PAD and then started arguing about that. I showed you a picture of what the thermal pad looked like then you pretty much agreed it's not a pad.

Originally posted by: Schmide

I remember in another thread about system power consumption you tried to call me straw man when I had edited my post because you always seem to be all riled up probably bi-polar. You pretty much reply to my posts to troll.

Nah. PSU VC here No edits. Just another misrepresentation. I stand by what I said and how I said it.

Stop playing troll victim. Irony number 9.

ROFL. Denial. I did not have sexual relations with that woman. "Bill Clinton"

You keep coming to my posts usually calling me names like strawman and telling me I argue for the sake of it. That was the first impression I had from you. You DID call me a strawman for editing my post. No?

Originally posted by: Schmide
About the edit: Seriously WTF. 4 posts above yours any argument was rendered moot by the calculations I made. (straw man)

:laugh:

Originally posted by: Schmide
So this

A fine opinion to have. I would pay serious money to see a q9550 with a 500mhz bus on a p965. You go gurl.

You seriously have some comprehension problems.

Originally posted by: Schmide

You do get angry and bitter because I give examples and proof that disapprove your claims. Probably waiting for me to reply to this right now as we speak so you can reply with more rhetoric with no examples or proof this p35 having 400 fsb limitation on yorkfield .

Not angry not bitter. Very entertained. Guess you missed this above, but you never really reply to what I say, just more attempts to change what I say.

People who are entertained usually sit back and laugh not post reply with "U go gurl"

Again that link is based on a lower phase power design which you missed or didn't know. That's what they get for buying cheap boards just because it has name recognition. Another guy who is educated in overclocking even says this in that same thread.

Either case, the limitation is the 4-phase power regulators. While advertised to support quad cores, when I removed my mobo to re-apply and re-mount my HSF, I found on the underside brown discoloration under the power regulators!

Originally posted by: Schmide

You always crumble when facts and examples are are presented upon you and change your stance like you did in this thread how good p35 boards can do mid 450fsb. This wasn't the first time I made you crumble either. I remember in another thread where you had changed your stance like this one.

Again you misrepresent me. I rarely talk in absolutes. Yet you read everything I say as a black and white fact. You have to learn the concepts of doable, probable, and not plain likely.

Either way it's your words not mine. You changed your stance multiple times on this thread alone. If you don't know you should really stop replying.

Originally posted by: Schmide

I just looked up O.P's gigabyte ds3-2 board. Its' based on 6 phase power design which is rather bad for overclocking. Considering there were sleuth of ds3-2 owners here they rather blame p35 boards than themselves for buying a cheap board. Gigabytes p45 board is based on 12 phase power design which cured these nub overclockers only to spread false rumors in this forum.

Darn nubs. Spread false rumors in this forum.

Don't blame them. Blame yourself.

Originally posted by: Schmide

They should all go out and get 965 motherboards so they can run their 1337 quads at 500mhz fsb.

I hope I'm not misquoting you.

Bitter much? My board is based on 8 phase power design while the OP is based on 4 phase power design. Guess which motherboard overclocks better.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

I think we should all relax here and just let this go and enjoy our lives

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: Azn

I just looked up O.P's gigabyte ds3-2 board. Its' based on 6 phase power design which is rather bad for overclocking. Considering there were sleuth of ds3-2 owners here they rather blame p35 boards than themselves for buying a cheap board. Gigabytes p45 board is based on 12 phase power design which cured these nub overclockers only to spread false rumors in this forum.

Gigabyte never made DS3L revision 1 or 2 board with 6-phase power design. Official Website

DS3L owners, including myself, stated specifically that these P35 boards, as well as most P35 boards are not sufficient for P35 425+FSB quad 45nm overclocking. Almost every link you provided only showed Abit IP35-Pro boards being able to accomplish this. You completely changed your argument to attempt to prove that since some # of P35 boards were able to hit high 45nm quad FSBs, then anyone who could not do so is a noob. This is flaws arguments in itself. But regardless, you failed to address OP's main concern regarding his motherboard. Since you've never owned a P35-DS3L board, you obviously don't know anything about its overclocking abilities.

For your information, you can only adjust the northbridge MCH voltage, FSB Termination Voltage and CPU voltage. There are no fancy adjustments such as PLL or Load Line Calibration etc. Your opinion of other overclockers being 'noobs' only highlights your ignorance of not understanding the technical differences and intricacies of the BIOS and Power circuitry/cooling limitations between different P35 motherboards as well the P35 vs. P45 chipset.

Providing a handful of links over the Internet regarding a few users who were able to hit high FSB is hardly relevant when by far the majority of P35 users will never hit those speeds on a Q9550, especially not on the 4-power phase P35-DS3L.

The fact that the OP was never able to get above 415 FSB only strengthened our comments with a real world example. The OP even stated no adjustments to FSB termination voltage, MCH or CPU core voltage would get the board Prime 95 stable. So you must have some "magic" hand then because no amount of voltage increases in the BIOS could get the chip above 415FSB.

Not to mention, not a single CPU-Z screenshot had a P35 chipset as proof.

4 phase even worse. I googled and it said it was 6 phase in one review which I quoted from.

You are right. I don't own ds3-L board and wouldn't buy one for having such low phase power design.

One thing is for sure FSB overclocking has nothing to do with whether the chipset is p35 or not. We can have a p45 board with 4 phase and still overclock like crap.

You don't have to believe those overclocks didn't come from a p35 board just to discredit those people who did. I could care less.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
All you have to do is close the quote above before you quote below. Not rocket science. With the amount of changing of facts with your edits, I have to over quote you!

Look I'm going to miss some of the quotes whether you LIKE it or NOT. I've already warned you about it. If you don't want to fix it again I already suggested you stop using quote on quotes. If you don't like it. TOUGH $hit.

It's not missing quotes it's failing to close them. Meh. Just asking for a little effort.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
That's pretty funny when there's no thermal pad on video cards but rather thermal paste. You claimed how better thermal paste makes 10C drop when the difference of different paste isn't that high of temperature change. Hilarious. I know. Only a bad contact can
lead you to 10C temp changes.

I can't get away form it. Exact same skew. Again not what I said. Point is moot.

I love how you just deny when the first post I made was about the heatsink could be in bad contact and then you replied with NO WAY IT'S THERMAL PASTE MAKES THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE. THEN YOU STARTED CALLING STOCK THERMAL PASTE ON VIDEO CARDS AS THERMAL PAD and then started arguing about that. I showed you a picture of what the thermal pad looked like then you pretty much agreed it's not a pad.

Ehh if you want to continue to make the argument, that my preception of what I saw on the HS was not a thermal pad. Bring the thread back up. Otherwise MOOT.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
I remember in another thread about system power consumption you tried to call me straw man when I had edited my post because you always seem to be all riled up probably bi-polar. You pretty much reply to my posts to troll.

Nah. PSU VC here No edits. Just another misrepresentation. I stand by what I said and how I said it.

Stop playing troll victim. Irony number 9.

ROFL. Denial. I did not have sexual relations with that woman. "Bill Clinton"

Relevance. Maybe I need to be impeached?

Originally posted by: Azn
You keep coming to my posts usually calling me names like strawman and telling me I argue for the sake of it. That was the first impression I had from you. You DID call me a strawman for editing my post. No?

Now this is irony uncountable. You don't call someone straw man you label their argument straw man. As for calling names, inadvertently or directly you've refered to me as nub, bi-polar, ignorant, angry, bitter, etc. I don't think I've ever referred to your character once, just the argument. Oh I did say "go gurl" sorry.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
About the edit: Seriously WTF. 4 posts above yours any argument was rendered moot by the calculations I made. (straw man)

:laugh:

Context. Look at it. Speaking of context the only person to ever call my arguments straw man is you, you on the other had have been called out more than once including by a moderator. Huh.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide
So this

A fine opinion to have. I would pay serious money to see a q9550 with a 500mhz bus on a p965. You go gurl.

You seriously have some comprehension problems.

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
You do get angry and bitter because I give examples and proof that disapprove your claims. Probably waiting for me to reply to this right now as we speak so you can reply with more rhetoric with no examples or proof this p35 having 400 fsb limitation on yorkfield .

Not angry not bitter. Very entertained. Guess you missed this above, but you never really reply to what I say, just more attempts to change what I say.

People who are entertained usually sit back and laugh not post reply with "U go gurl"

I thought it was funny. Still a lot above needs an explanation, nah lets focus on the funny.

Originally posted by: Azn
Again that link is based on a lower phase power design which you missed or didn't know. That's what they get for buying cheap boards just because it has name recognition. Another guy who is educated in overclocking even says this in that same thread.

Either case, the limitation is the 4-phase power regulators. While advertised to support quad cores, when I removed my mobo to re-apply and re-mount my HSF, I found on the underside brown discoloration under the power regulators!

Is this meant for me?

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
You always crumble when facts and examples are are presented upon you and change your stance like you did in this thread how good p35 boards can do mid 450fsb. This wasn't the first time I made you crumble either. I remember in another thread where you had changed your stance like this one.

Again you misrepresent me. I rarely talk in absolutes. Yet you read everything I say as a black and white fact. You have to learn the concepts of doable, probable, and not plain likely.

Either way it's your words not mine. You changed your stance multiple times on this thread alone. If you don't know you should really stop replying.

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
I just looked up O.P's gigabyte ds3-2 board. Its' based on 6 phase power design which is rather bad for overclocking. Considering there were sleuth of ds3-2 owners here they rather blame p35 boards than themselves for buying a cheap board. Gigabytes p45 board is based on 12 phase power design which cured these nub overclockers only to spread false rumors in this forum.

Darn nubs. Spread false rumors in this forum.

Don't blame them. Blame yourself.

Originally posted by: Schmide

They should all go out and get 965 motherboards so they can run their 1337 quads at 500mhz fsb.

I hope I'm not misquoting you.

Bitter much? My board is based on 8 phase power design while the OP is based on 6 phase power design. Guess which motherboard overclocks better.

Scarasm powerful yet hardly literal. Motherboard ePeen FTW.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Azn
My board does 500fsb with E6300 since my E6300 is capable of 3.5ghz @ 500fsb at least that's what I've tested up to because my memory was limiting my overclock or at least that's what it seemed as I only have ddr2-800.

Now If I get a Q9550 and this chip is capable of 500fsb I don't see any reason that my p965 board can't do the 500fsb with that processor.

And that right there is where you fail with your lack of experience.

775 quads just don't overclock to teh same FSB levels as dual-cores. The fact that there are two dice, wired to teh same FSB, rather than just one, should make it obvious for you. There is greater capacitive loading on the signal lines, along with more noise, that just makes it impossible for a quad to OC to the same FSB levels as a dual.

Never said quad overclock to same fsb as dual core. I never said this. I've underlined what you missed.

You directly implied it, by stating that your dual-core overclocked to 500FSB in that board, so you suggested that a quad would likewise overclock to 500 on that board. I'm here to tell you that you're wrong, you cannot.

The max stable FSB, is a function of both devices that connect over that FSB, the CPU, and the chipset. As well, the ability to run at a high FSB has to be engineered into the motherboard layout and design. The motherboard also has to supply enough power for the CPU to run at that high a Ghz.

Just because your motherboard can hit 500Mhz FSB with a dual-core, and you have a quad-core that will hit 500Mhz FSB in an EP45-UD3R/P, does NOT mean that the quad will also hit 500Mhz FSB on your board. Becuase the UD3R/P has extra engineering margin on the FSB, as it will allow duals to hit much in excess of 500FSB. So quads hit lower FSB than duals, so quads (good CPUs) will hit a max of around 500FSB on those boards. Since your board hits 500FSB with duals, and not 600FSB, your max FSB with a quad-core is going to be much lower. Why? Because of the capacitive loading and noise margins. It's the same reason that on Nehalem, Intel species a max RAM speed, that DECREASES as you add DIMMs. More capacitive loading on the memory lines from the chip, causes the max speed that it can run to decrease. Just like the FSB on 775 CPUs and chipsets.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Azn
My board does 500fsb with E6300 since my E6300 is capable of 3.5ghz @ 500fsb at least that's what I've tested up to because my memory was limiting my overclock or at least that's what it seemed as I only have ddr2-800.

Now If I get a Q9550 and this chip is capable of 500fsb I don't see any reason that my p965 board can't do the 500fsb with that processor.

And that right there is where you fail with your lack of experience.

775 quads just don't overclock to teh same FSB levels as dual-cores. The fact that there are two dice, wired to teh same FSB, rather than just one, should make it obvious for you. There is greater capacitive loading on the signal lines, along with more noise, that just makes it impossible for a quad to OC to the same FSB levels as a dual.

Never said quad overclock to same fsb as dual core. I never said this. I've underlined what you missed.

You directly implied it, by stating that your dual-core overclocked to 500FSB in that board, so you suggested that a quad would likewise overclock to 500 on that board. I'm here to tell you that you're wrong, you cannot.

The max stable FSB, is a function of both devices that connect over that FSB, the CPU, and the chipset. As well, the ability to run at a high FSB has to be engineered into the motherboard layout and design. The motherboard also has to supply enough power for the CPU to run at that high a Ghz.

Just because your motherboard can hit 500Mhz FSB with a dual-core, and you have a quad-core that will hit 500Mhz FSB in an EP45-UD3R/P, does NOT mean that the quad will also hit 500Mhz FSB on your board. Becuase the UD3R/P has extra engineering margin on the FSB, as it will allow duals to hit much in excess of 500FSB. So quads hit lower FSB than duals, so quads (good CPUs) will hit a max of around 500FSB on those boards. Since your board hits 500FSB with duals, and not 600FSB, your max FSB with a quad-core is going to be much lower. Why? Because of the capacitive loading and noise margins. It's the same reason that on Nehalem, Intel species a max RAM speed, that DECREASES as you add DIMMs. More capacitive loading on the memory lines from the chip, causes the max speed that it can run to decrease. Just like the FSB on 775 CPUs and chipsets.

Thanks for that detailed explanation.

Has your explanation been proven? I mean it's all good in theory but without proper testing you can only ASSUME just I like assumed. Don't you think that capacitive loading and noise margins also apply to the processor as well? 1 core might not like extra fsb while the other 3 cores can while a dual core is easier because it's only 2 core to worry about than 4.

500fsb is the max I've tested this board at. I'm not sure what the max is as I don't have the memory to max the FSB.

 

[AzN]

Schmide. If you are finished bickering prove what you originally said about p35 boards having 400fsb limit on yorkfield. Kind of ironic considering you said a GOOD p35 board can hit MID 400fsb.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Azn
Schmide. If you are finished bickering prove what you originally said about p35 boards having 400fsb limit on yorkfield. Kind of ironic considering you said a GOOD p35 board can hit MID 400fsb.

I guess I could, but that would be arguing something that wasn't my argument. Darn what's that called? Even if I did I'd probably just be called an ignorant nubber with angry bi-polar bitterness.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

*grabs popcorn*

 

[Schmide]

Formal proof structure.

For all motherboards capable of running socket 775 yorkfield/pernyn processors there exists a subset of these boards that are run on a p35 chipset.

Let x be the set of all socket 775 motherboards
Let y be the set of p35 motherboards
Let z be the set of all yorkfield processors

For every y there must exist a z

Let F(y) equal z

Entering the numbers

n=1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610,...

We end up with the sum of all motherboards such that

The sum from n to infinity (-1)^(n+1) * ((x^n)/n)

Because this is an alternating series it converges, therefore there is a finite number of boards that can reach 400fsb and those who exceed it must converge at ln(1+x) since this is an assymptopic number it must be an upper bound.

Q.E.D. (quod erat demonstrandum)

Bonus points for what nuber sequence and what expansion is used above.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
Schmide. If you are finished bickering prove what you originally said about p35 boards having 400fsb limit on yorkfield. Kind of ironic considering you said a GOOD p35 board can hit MID 400fsb.

I guess I could, but that would be arguing something that wasn't my argument. Darn what's that called? Even if I did I'd probably just be called an ignorant nubber with angry bi-polar bitterness.

Then stop being so bitter. You come to my posts to troll me and bait instead of debating. Start posting stuff like "irony #1" "irony #2"... What do I say to that? I've been trying to be civil the entire time as much as I could but when you got guys trying to bait you into a non-constructive way sometimes you can't help yourself.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Azn
Schmide. If you are finished bickering prove what you originally said about p35 boards having 400fsb limit on yorkfield. Kind of ironic considering you said a GOOD p35 board can hit MID 400fsb.

I guess I could, but that would be arguing something that wasn't my argument. Darn what's that called? Even if I did I'd probably just be called an ignorant nubber with angry bi-polar bitterness.

Then stop being so bitter. You come to my posts to troll me and bait instead of debating. Start posting stuff like "irony #1" "irony #2"... What do I say to that? I've been trying to be civil the entire time as much as I could but when you got guys trying to bait you into a non-constructive way sometimes you can't help yourself.

Now you're going to play victim? Seriously, if it's ironic it's ironic. (How can I not call irony on the bold statement above) I guess if we're keeping score. What about?

1) Calling names. Whether you're right or wrong, labeling someone or classes of people doesn't make you look good.
2) Not respecting other opinions or observations.
3) For you there is little room for compromise, when someones says "That's not my opinion or argument" respect that. If someone asks you a question, don't say see page 3. Give a strait answer even if you have to repeat yourself.
4) Lack of a sense of humor. (Then again maybe you're playing so deadpan it's actually funny)

In the end just be cool. I like you. You just need to not take such a hard line. Learn to disagree without creating a bunch of drama.

I do admit that I do play you a little, but don't we all play each other? As others have said, sometimes we just have to let things go.

You didn't like my Math Technical Sproof at all?

 

[AzN]

Enough with your bicker. I'm second tired of it. It is you who came in this thread first posting stupid shit like Irony 1~9 did you not? You aren't being constructive. the fact that I replied with few things of my own to you is because of it. If you are going to point stuff out I'm also going to point you out.

I don't have to respect opinions especially when there's no proof of p35 being limited to 400fsb on yorkfield without a good explanation like VirtualLarry did. The fact that you telling me I have to respect it is silly on it's own. I'm not a funny guy nor a comedian and I don't care to be.

Your math above is silly and making not much sense.

Enough with the antagonistic posts. No more bitter, angry or bi-polar remarks.
Keep to the subject matter. Do not get personal. Do not call troll to everyone who
disagrees with you or requests evidence of a claim from you. Can you manage this?
If not, stop posting.

Anandtech Moderator - Keysplayr

Where were you when Schmide's made personal remarks in the thermal paste thread? Ever since then he's been harassing biting his time. I know I was being personal at the end and I apologize for that but this guy has been antagonistic and trying to stir things ever since then while I usually stay away from his post unless he directly replies to me.

Second when someone keep asking you to post something you have no control over and they know that then what do you call that? That's trolling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response

If you keep provoking the mods, you will find a vacation in your near future ! Did you read Keys statement above ?

Markfw900
Anandtech Moderator

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Azn
Enough with your bicker. I'm second tired of it. It is you who came in this thread first posting stupid shit like Irony 1~9 did you not? You aren't being constructive. the fact that I replied with few things of my own to you is because of it. If you are going to point stuff out I'm also going to point you out.

I don't have to respect opinions especially when there's no proof of p35 being limited to 400fsb on yorkfield without a good explanation like VirtualLarry did. The fact that you telling me I have to respect it is silly on it's own. I'm not a funny guy nor a comedian and I don't care to be.

Your math above is silly and making not much sense.

Enough with the antagonistic posts. No more bitter, angry or bi-polar remarks.
Keep to the subject matter. Do not get personal. Do not call troll to everyone who
disagrees with you or requests evidence of a claim from you. Can you manage this?
If not, stop posting.

Anandtech Moderator - Keysplayr

Where were you when Schmide's made personal remarks in the thermal paste thread? Ever since then he's been harassing biting his time. I know I was being personal at the end and I apologize for that but this guy has been antagonistic and trying to stir things ever since then while I usually stay away from his post unless he directly replies to me.

Second when someone keep asking you to post something you have no control over and they know that then what do you call that? That's trolling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response

I just re-read the whole thread. The worst thing I said was.

Originally posted by: Schmide
I often wonder if you disagree just for the sake of it?

If you're going to call me out, at least show the evidence. If you read the thread I stayed on topic the whole time. In the same thread.

Originally posted by: read the thread
I, too, have noticed Azn do little but disagree on these forums; and yes, oversimplify things.

If that's where all this stems from? I'm sorry.