My New AMD rig

[bradley]

I can run my mom's G2 5000+ OCCT stable at 4x .725 Volts on air. Again I wouldn't be surprised if this was just as byproduct of voltage regulator quality. Although, RMClock seems to have a problem with 64-bit registers, or some other unexplained mystery. I've tried just about every setting using Vista x64, both Intel and AMD, and haven't had as much luck. Again, these have been my observations. Lately I actually get more satisfaction from undervolting than overclocking.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
Im asking that all of you guys respect other people and let them be happy.

AS i said... THE ONLY PERSON THAT MATTERS IS THE PERSON WHO BUILT IT.

ITS NOT YOUR MACHINE SO WHY ARE YOU RANTING SO MUCH ABOUT IT?

if your happy with the machine, then it is a project well done.



To set things straight:
1. There is NOTHING WRONG with an AMD machine. They are excellent machines and will do MORE then the average person requires.

2. AMD however IS NOWHERE NEAR TOP TIER. And yes We all know INTEL is faster, but this isnt the point of this thread.

Lets keep the focus on AMD in this thread. You guys with Intel points, dont worry, i'll make sure nothing gets misinformed.

But lets leave Intel out of this for now please. Intel seems to be gasoline on fire in this thread.

And if you guys want to get all nit picky, Erinyes is probably faster then most Q6600 builds on this forum. And SHE's an AMD.
Of course builder/budget is totally different, and thats why.

But its how you make the machine, and if your happy with it.

Erinyes scores 15k in 3dmark with my HD3870's in Xfire. :T

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[rbk123]

Originally posted by: perdomot
While you can OC the Q6600 to higher speeds, you take a risk of corrupting data or causing annoying errors in Windows. Maybe I'm just getting old but those little annoyances have become to bothersome to deal with.

Here's where the thread went south inviting the Intel fanboys in - it went from a risk of corrupting data, to a tacit guarantee in the next sentence.

I have 2 AMD machines and 1 Intel machine (originally a 2140, now a Q6600).
- all 3 are overclocked
- all 3 have no stability issues and have that "Mac-like stability feel"; whatever that may be
- none have corrupting data issues
- none have annoying errors in Windows
- the Intel machine is faster but it's not very noticeable


Would I recommend AMD? Yes.
Would I imply that Intel is unstable, or that AMD is more stable? No.

 

[bradley]

Originally posted by: dmens

according to google 0.7V, which happens to be the lowest possible VID, is almost universally unstable. not surprisingly really since at that voltage, most 6T bitcells can't even hold a value. so perhaps AMD might not want to trumpet 0.7V stability because it looks like it is a 1-in-10000 part anomaly.

These were my observations. Feel free to post your own real-world examples as well. I actually find them helpful, away from the marketing-speak that seems to now proliferate most review sites. I especially appreciate seeing both sides of an issue equally represented, especially when one side is so vociferous as to foster an imbalance.

Originally posted by: dmens
btw, one of the most annoying rumors about nehalem is that is supposedly copied the IMC and/or HT from AMD. you really shouldn't say that because it makes you sound like a complete jackass.

The Hypertransport Consortium is led by a whole host of companies, which not only includes AMD, but also Nvidia, Apple, Cisco, Sun, Transmeta, etc. the standard itself also being employed in high-end workstations and routers. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if Intel draws some inspiration in trying to retain a semblance of compatibility. This is not a bad thing.

 

[Bradtechonline]

I sold my E6850 off to a friend, and he put a 8800GTS G92 in it.. I put a X2 6400+ in my old AMD mobo, and we both play together.. For the most part our FPS is close to one another.. He may pull 10-15 fps more in AoC than me at times.. I play with Anti Aliasing and max quality.. Mine just cannot OC at all, it's hit it's design limits, and his has headroom which does not matter since he does not Overclock..

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: bradley
These were my observations. Feel free to post your own real-world examples as well. I actually find them helpful, away from the marketing-speak that seems to now proliferate most review sites. I especially appreciate seeing both sides of an issue equally represented, especially when one side is so vociferous as to foster an imbalance.

single user testimonials are about the most useless possible reference points for computing performance because they can be easily biased in just about every metric, and that's not even accounting for the variation that exists within the cpu's themselves. in fact, supposedly genuine user testimonials are often used by marketing departments in all different industries to create product hype. so it is not surprising that fanboys and marketing depts are fans of the technique, they really have the same end goal.

The Hypertransport Consortium is led by a whole host of companies, which not only includes AMD, but also Nvidia, Apple, Cisco, Sun, Transmeta, etc. the standard itself also being employed in high-end workstations and routers. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if Intel draws some inspiration in trying to retain a semblance of compatibility. This is not a bad thing.

compatibility between two completely different protocols and specifications? what for? i only bring up the point because the current AMD marketing line is that nehalem is 2003 technology, and the fanboys are lapping it up.