|
|
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11538 |   GX-Brandon (385) Aug 05, 2006 - 01:26 pm » Edited on Aug 05, 2006 - 01:25 pm
| Noisy and take up too much space? Have you looked into any of the SFF systems or even HTPC cases? You can build desktop systems that are just as quiet if not quieter than some notebooks with the right selection of components.
I just wouldn't want you spending more money on a laptop based on misconceptions, especially since it looks like your desktop rig isn't bad at all, you probably just need to swap out the cooling and case. That will save yourself some serious $$$. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11499 | GX-Brandon (385) Aug 05, 2006 - 09:46 am » Edited on Aug 05, 2006 - 09:45 am
| Yes, all Core 2 Duos have locked multipliers, only the Extreme has an unlocked multipler.
The multiplier on the E6400 is 8.0, while the C2D E6300 has a locked multiplier of 7.0.
Since the E6400 has a higher multiplier, you don't have to crank the FSB up as much to get a good OC. Just to get 3.0GHz out of an E6300 requires an FSB speed of 430MHz. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11499 | GX-Brandon (385) Aug 05, 2006 - 09:44 am
| | deimos: Yes, if you refer to the CoD 2 benchmarking article then you'll know pretty much everything about our custom demo. I've decided to switch to a new demo for CoD 2 and you'll see it in my next article. In hindsight I think the demo I used previously may have been too intense, at the time I thought it would scale well with faster hardware but it seems like it's not. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11430 | GX-Brandon (385) Jul 30, 2006 - 11:32 am
| 64-bit CPUs have been on the market for quite some time now. So long in fact that I think you'd have a harder time finding a 32-bit CPU than a 64-bit, especially after the latest round of AMD/Intel price cuts.
I'm sure we'll test their claims on DX9 vs DX10 performance though, as well as WinXP vs Vista. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11245 | GX-Brandon (385) Jul 21, 2006 - 08:20 am
| In case you didn't notice, our article included both single-GPU and multi-GPU results. It also included both low-res and high-res results.
In those high-res results, the CPU was bottlenecked by the GPU and the performance across the various processors was the same. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11166 | GX-Brandon (385) Jul 17, 2006 - 12:05 am
| | Scary part is those numbers are running with the P5W DH's Turbo Mode disabled. I know in the past the Turbo setting has brought a couple of percentage points in added performance. But yes, I have been experimenting with the FSB and Core 2 is definitely scaling well so far. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11143 | GX-Brandon (385) Jul 15, 2006 - 01:43 am » Edited on Jul 15, 2006 - 04:04 am
| I agree with deimos, if you saw our CPU scaling articles with GeForce 7800 GTX, you saw a 3500+ keeping up with an FX-57 one year ago:
http://firingsquad.com/hardware/athlon_64_geforce_7800_gtx_scaling/
If you look through our archives you'll find similar scaling articles for GeForce 6 generation, FX, etc, all the way back to the GeForce 2/3 IIRC, so it's not like this is some new occurance that we haven't documented. And if you check out our benchmarks with Pacific Fighters you'll find margins of 20%+ at 16x12, so it's not like there aren't cases of that out there. Also remember that many of Intel's press demos at IDF and other events were conducted with CrossFire rigs at 16x12, with 2 X1900 XTX's running in CrossFire at that res you're not nearly as GPU-bound as if you would be if you were running with just 1 card.
EDIT: What I really don't get about the hardocp review is how they suggest they're doing anything different than other sites. You can go back to our CPU reviews from last year or before that to see we ran a mixture of high-res and low-res testing. We've been showing for quite awhile that the slower CPUs run just as fast as the latest and greatest at 16x12, as you're obviously GPU-bound at that setting. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11143 | GX-Brandon (385) Jul 14, 2006 - 03:07 pm
| At the time I wrote that piece I saw Newegg.com selling the Core 2 Extreme for $1,300, listed as "in stock". You can see my news post about it on this site in fact.
Newegg has since removed that entry from their site, my guess is Intel has asked them to hold sales until the launch day 2 weeks from now. Flag this | Edit this post |
|
|
|
|
