• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Got a 4300. thinking about moving processors around.

T

TType85

[H]ard|Gawd
2FA
Joined
Jul 8, 2001
Messages
1,577
Ok, I have 3 systems

1. Main Rig: used for video encoding, web surfing, .net development (no real gaming).
gigabyte 965-DS3 C2D 6400 OC'd to 3Ghz with an artic freezer 7 (I think) with 2GB PC6400 ram.
2. HTPC 1: Living room HTPC hooked to 50" DLP, quiet and must stay that way.
Abit IT-90HD C2D 6300 running stock speeds with Zalman CNPS8000 1GB DDR2-667
3. HTPC 2: Bedroom HTPC hooked up to a 32" LCD
Gigabyte GA-945G-S2 C2D 4300 running stock speeds, stock fan, 1GB DDR2-533

I use rig 1 for most of my encoding (DVD to h264) but I also plan on using the other systems to do some of the work too. Would it make sense to do this?

Move 4300 to #1 OC to 3-3.2ghz.
Keep the 6300 in #2 setup is quiet and fast.
Move 6400 to #3 run at stock speeds.

By doing that I won't loose a whole lot of speed in the main rig, but pick up alot in the 2nd HTPC. The 2nd HTPC motherboard will not OC.
 
why do you need more horsepower in the HTPC?

seems like all the heavy duty stuff is done on rig #1, so i would try and max out the speed on that one, and keep the others cool and quiet on stock
 
I would obviously think that would be a good idea if you get the E4300 as high as you want.... no reason to NOT have a C2D as overclocked as it can be ;)
 
put your fastest processor (with overclock) in rig #1. then out of the two left, put the faster processor at stock speeds in htpc #1.
 
DrFreeze said:
why do you need more horsepower in the HTPC?

seems like all the heavy duty stuff is done on rig #1, so i would try and max out the speed on that one, and keep the others cool and quiet on stock
Click to expand...

The HPTC needs more horsepower when I add HD-DVD or Blue-Ray down the line. I want to move some of the intensive stuff to the others to do. I have alot of DVD's to re-encode, first time I did it, I made a few mistakes in resizing that you can see on the 50" DLP.

If I have 3 going its going to take alot less time than 1!
 
Swapped the 4300 into my my main rig. OC'd easily to 3.29ghz. Did a real world comparison to my 6400@3ghz.

I took a episode of the Simpsons off of a DVD, using the latest version of Nero Recode I encoded to Cinema AVC 2.0MB bitrate, deinterlaced, 2 pass encode.

6400@3.0Ghz (375x8)
1st Pass avg of 65fps
2nd Pass avg of 26fps

4300@3.29Ghz (366x9)
1st Pass avg of 56fps
2nd Pass avg of 22fps

14% slower using the 4300@3.24ghz

Until I get a Q6600, i'm sticking with the 6400 in the main rig.
 
those numbers look way out of whack

even if this app is VERY FSB sensitive, a 9 mhz difference in FSB speed shouldnt cause anywhere near 14% performance difference
 
DrFreeze said:
those numbers look way out of whack

even if this app is VERY FSB sensitive, a 9 mhz difference in FSB speed shouldnt cause anywhere near 14% performance difference
Click to expand...

The mhz difference is negligible. The cache difference, however, is not. We're also comparing Allendale and Conroe cores here.
 
Tzzird said:
The mhz difference is negligible. The cache difference, however, is not. We're also comparing Allendale and Conroe cores here.
Click to expand...

6400 is a 2mb L2 part, just as the e4300, only the 6420 has 4 mb L2

if this particular 6400 is a conroe, then it will have half its cache disabled
 
It is an allendale. I can't explain it, but clock for clock it is slower on my system. Same exact settings, just swap the CPU, re-overclock it.
 
TType85 said:
It is an allendale. I can't explain it, but clock for clock it is slower on my system. Same exact settings, just swap the CPU, re-overclock it.
Click to expand...

hmmmm proof?

I have never read such a thing. All reviews/articles attribute the slightly lower performance of Allendale to lower L2 cache or lower FSB. The Conroes do tend to overclock better but this is most likely due to shady manufacturing practices with the Allendale 4300 which uses grease for the IHS as opposed to being soldered like most Conroes which makes them run hotter. Search this forums and extremesystems to find the thread about this.
 
merlingt1 said:
hmmmm proof?

I have never read such a thing. All reviews/articles attribute the slightly lower performance of Allendale to lower L2 cache or lower FSB. The Conroes do tend to overclock better but this is most likely due to shady manufacturing practices with the Allendale 4300 which uses grease for the IHS as opposed to being soldered like most Conroes which makes them run hotter. Search this forums and extremesystems to find the thread about this.
Click to expand...

hmm, id love to slot in a e6600 and compare the two, both at 9x266, if only the reason i got a e4300 wasnt that im to cheap to get a e6600 now :D

honestly though, im quite happy with the e4300, runs 2.4 at stock Vcore, is considerably faster then my old x2 (which couldnt OC due to 4x512 dimms)
 
merlingt1 said:
hmmmm proof?

I have never read such a thing. All reviews/articles attribute the slightly lower performance of Allendale to lower L2 cache or lower FSB. The Conroes do tend to overclock better but this is most likely due to shady manufacturing practices with the Allendale 4300 which uses grease for the IHS as opposed to being soldered like most Conroes which makes them run hotter. Search this forums and extremesystems to find the thread about this.
Click to expand...

I should have kept the logs. Strange thing today, another simpsons episode, same settings, FPS dropped a bunch. Maybe my DS3 is flakey. I might give the 4300 another run.
 
DrFreeze said:
hmm, id love to slot in a e6600 and compare the two, both at 9x266, if only the reason i got a e4300 wasnt that im to cheap to get a e6600 now :D

honestly though, im quite happy with the e4300, runs 2.4 at stock Vcore, is considerably faster then my old x2 (which couldnt OC due to 4x512 dimms)
Click to expand...

The 4300 hit 3.0ghz at stock Vcore. Quite impressive.
 
oh im well aware im not pushing my e4300 yet, im just happy this is all so painless, this is my first cpu that actually clocks worth a damn:

AMD 3400: 130 nm clawhammer core, so wouldnt go past 2.5, and needed lots of volts
AMD x2 3800: 4x512 dimms and a so-so mobo >> no OC

and now going from 1.8 to 2.4 is easy as setting the FSB to 1066 and rebooting :D

once i fix my SLI problem (somehow SLI doesnt kick in) i think ill try 2.7, im kind of wanting to break the 20 second mark on superpi :D (old amd record was 35s on 2.5, this baby does 24s on 2.4 :p)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top