Q6600 + Abit IP35 Pro... Overclocking friendly?

[oscarmorasu]

Hello everyone.
I've read Anandtech for years and years, but this is the first time I post.

After a couple years I'm back to have fun building my own machine. I'll use it mostly for programming (Visual Studio 2005, SQL Server 2005, IIS, test server), multimedia encoding and streaming, HD playback, and some graphic design stuff (Dreamweaver, Photoshop).
Gaming is not in the picture right now, but I want to leave the door open.
I've done some overclocking in the past, and I want to squeeze all the juice I can from my new PC. I'm looking for a powerful, overclocking friendly machine.
After reading some comments here in the forums and in newegg, this is what I have in mind:

OS: Windows XP (or Windows Vista Ultimate 64 to use all 4GB of RAM. Haven't made up my mind yet)
CPU: Intel Q6600
Heatsink: Zalman 9700
Motherboard: Abit IP35 Pro
RAM: 4x1GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800
HDD: 2 x Seagate 500GB
PSU: CORSAIR HX CMPSU-520HX 520W
Case: Antec P180

I have a few questions:

1) Any critique, comment, opinion about this configuration (i.e. What would you add, what would you change?)
2) I'm still using Windows XP, I've barely played a little bit with with Vista. It looks nice, but I still see no reason to stop using XP. Is it worth the upgrade?
3) I want to test the stuff I do on both Windows XP and Vista. Is it posible to have a dual boot configuration?
4) Any recommendation for the graphic card? Remember gaming is not the main purpose of this machine, but smooth HD playback is desired.
5) What else do I need for my overclocking experiment? (fans, thermal grease, etc...)

Thanks in advance.

 

[myocardia]

First, welcome to anandtech. Second, if you're planning on overclocking much, you'll be much better served by buying two 2GB sticks of RAM. Note, though, that with both XP and Vista, you have to install the OS with only one stick installed, with nearly every motherboard I've ever seen. And is it worth it to move to Vista now? Not in my opinion. Wait, like me, until you actually need to buy it, and they've gotten all of the bugs taken out of both it, and the drivers for it.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Don't need RAID? Go with Abit IP35-E. The Pro share one heat sink between NB, SB, and MOSFETs. This can cause the MOSFETs to hit 80C when you overclock a quad.

IP35-E has a separate heat sink for MOSFETs. Those who have reached 3.7GHz with Q6600 report 62 to 65C PWM temperature. IP35-E has a more robust BIOS. No loss of fan speed control, or flashing BIOS screen. The -E's double post issue has been fixed with a new Beta BIOS.

 

[oscarmorasu]

Thanks for the recommendations guys. I'll drop the memory to 2GB and start my installation with only one stick, then I'll add the second. I didn't know the IP35-E runs cooler than the Pro version. Since RAID is not absolutely necessary to me, I'll get that one.

Now, I've been thinking about the quad CPU, and I think I can live with "only" two cores instead of four. I rather have two cores running cooler and faster. What's your recommendation in this matter? The candidates seem to be the E6420, E6600 or the E6750.
Also, is it harder (or easier) to overclock a 1333 FSB CPU compared to a 1066 one?

Thanks again.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Performance between C2D chips are essentially the same at the same core speed. If you can get a C2D chip north of 3.0GHz, then the major source of your bottleneck will be the GPU. Find the best deal on E2140, E2160, E4300, or E4400. These will cost between $70 to $90. Abit IP35-E can easily oveclock a good chip north of 3.4GHz.

65nm Quads still put out too much heat at this time. It's best to wait for software vendors to fully embrace Quads before engaging. 45nm Quads should be widely available same time next year with the entry price between $150 and $200. IP35-E will still support those chips.

 

[brencat]

@ Oscar: If you decide to go dual core, my vote is for the E6420. While I was initially interested in the E6750, the OCing results I've seen even from a few friends have been relatively underwhelming compared to the hyped expectations. Plus, many places are selling the E6750 for only a few dollars less than the $229 E6600. Save yourself at least $40 bucks and go with the E6420 -- same 8x multi and cache as the E6750 and 1066/1333 bus diff won't matter when you're running @ 450 FSB with that Abit board

@myocardia: Does having 4 x 1gb sticks (all slots populated) dramatically reduce OCing headroom vs 2 x 2gb sticks? If so, to what extent?

 

[SerpentRoyal]

I was able to push four stick up to 576MHz RAM speed. Two sticks is a little better @ 580MHz. Both at 2T. There is negligible performance gain between 1T and 2T with Intel CPUs.

The key is to secure high quality memory.

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
I was able to push four stick up to 576MHz RAM speed. Two sticks is a little better @ 580MHz. Both at 2T. There is negligible performance gain between 1T and 2T with Intel CPUs.

The key is to secure high quality memory.

:thumbsup:

I agree. While there may be a performance hit with 4 sticks of RAM, the quality of 1gb sticks at this point is far and above that of 2gb sticks (especially with the existence and availability of micron d9 chips). The simple fact is, 2gb sticks at this point in time just don't overclock as well as 1gb sticks. Maybe things will change in the future with the advent of DDR3, but it won't matter if you're buying a system now. Stick with 4x 1gb sticks.

 

[brencat]

Good...because I've got 4 x 1gb Ballistix that I bought when RAM prices tanked a couple months back. Still waiting to buy a few more things for my build. I asked b/c I don't recall ever hearing about potential probs with all 4 slots filled.

 

[Synomenon]

I've been installing XP and recently Vista with four 2GB sticks installed. No problems. How are so many people having problems installing these OSs with more than one stick of RAM?