• 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.

Is water cooling really needed to overclock?

D

Dutt1113

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
1,623
All I want to know is if water cooling is really needed when overclocking cpu or can you just have a really good hsf?
 
ok then, can anyone recommend a really good hsf that I could use and still be able to overclock my cpu a lot?
 
a lot of people use the XP-90 or XP-120 series of heatsinks to overclock. I have the XP-90 (got it for $24.95 at SVC.com) and love it. Best heatsink I've ever owned. Keeps my CPU cool enough at idle that the mb shuts off the cpu fan. I've also never seen my temps get above 40c with it even with my A64 oc'd to 2.6ghz.
 
i've never used it but...

a lot of people talk about zalman's cpns 7xxx series hsf. the awesome blossom is huge and like the xp90/120 removes heat very well
 
sorry. I'm looking to upgrade to an amd 64 4000+ and want to overclock it from 2.4 to at least 2.6ghz. So your saying the xp-90c is awesome when it comes to being able to overclock, almost as good as water cooling maybe?
 
well that depends on what kind of watercooling you're comparing it to and what kind of fan you use with the xp-90. But it is generally considered to be about as good as mid range water cooling when used with a nice fan. Definitely a good heatsink and it sounds like your best option since you sound reluctant to go with watercooling
 
Yea,I would just get the heatsink.If you have good air flow and some nice space and planned out cooling it will easily handle your overclocks.With a watercooling system you're looking at I'm saying it was at least cost 150-200 for something that will please you.Thats if your lucky.IMO
 
ezland00 said:
does water cool make your system any queiter?
Click to expand...

yes and no. It depends on the fans you have on your radiator and also on the noise that the pump generates (which is usually less than what the fans produce). If you have a large radiator that takes large fans (spin slower, therefor quieter than a smaller fan spinning faster to move the same amount of air) then it could be quieter. Or you could use a passive cooling solution like a very large radiator, Zalmen Reserator, or bong cooler.

like someone else said though....you'll be spending at least around $200 to be somewhat pleased with your w/c setup vs ~$39 for a xp-90 or even an xp-120.
 
Just curious, but why are you buying a $475 a64 4000+ with hopes of oc'ing to 2.6ghz, when you could buy a $146/$190 3000+/3200+ that should at least oc to 2.4ghz....up to 2.8ghz? Then use the money saved for either a water cooling setup,7800gtx,2gb ram,lots of pr0n,etc
 
If I saved money and bought a lower end cpu like you said, a amd 64 3000+/3200+, would I be able to overclock it to 2.8ghz with an xp-90c, the new cnps9500-led coming out soon or any other really good heatsink. However, If I bought a 4000+, would I be able to overclock it passed 2.8ghz using the same types of heatsinks?
 
scrap the xp-120 or 90 get an asetek vapochill micro here arrives July 25...supposedly 28 degrees Celsius
 
would you go with the asetek vapochill micro or the Zalman cnps9500-led also coming out soon?
 
It depends on the benchmarks for both. The actual noise level and cooling performance is yet to be released - other than Zalman ad propaghanda.
 
Dutt1113 said:
sorry. I'm looking to upgrade to an amd 64 4000+ and want to overclock it from 2.4 to at least 2.6ghz. So your saying the xp-90c is awesome when it comes to being able to overclock, almost as good as water cooling maybe?
Click to expand...

With such a mild over clock and good case airflow an XP-90 with something like a Thermal Take CAT-90 fan you should never see temps above 40c assuming your room temp is about 75f or lower.
 
would you go with the asetek vapochill micro or the Zalman cnps9500-led also coming out soon?
Click to expand...

depends on price and performance ratio.
btw they are both realeased on the 25 of july
 
screw watercooling. get yourself a good CPU/motherboard combo with a good heatsink and you'll be all set.

here's my 3GHz 630 chip running at 4.2GHz (on my Asus P5WD2 motherboard) on nothing but good 'ol air cooling. ;)

latestCPUscreenie3.jpg


-and as you can see, my memory numbers arent too damn shabby either.

latestCPUscreenie2.jpg
 
Dutt1113 said:
If I saved money and bought a lower end cpu like you said, a amd 64 3000+/3200+, would I be able to overclock it to 2.8ghz with an xp-90c, the new cnps9500-led coming out soon or any other really good heatsink. However, If I bought a 4000+, would I be able to overclock it passed 2.8ghz using the same types of heatsinks?
Click to expand...

So far, I've only seen 2 oc's on the 4000+, 2725 on air, and 3105 with phase change cooling. There's no garauntee that anything will overclock well, but the trend is on the 3000/3200 averaging ~2700mhz. Just something to consider.
 
Yea, 3000+ and 3200+ tend to top out at about 2.7-2.8 on air. 4000+, 3700+, 3800+, etc, don't get NEARLY as much of an OC. They will all probably top out at abuot 100-200 mhz more than the 3200+.

Since you are going air, I'd get the 3200+ to guarentee about 2.8. A 3000+ will start to become pretty hot at 2.8, but a 3200+ will be easier to handle.

I haven't seen much about these "Vapochill Micro" and "9500", but I know that I prefer Thermalright's current lineup to Zalman's. Ignoring the upcoming coolers, I'd get a XP-90 and a Panaflo 92mm M1A for great value. The XP-90c is too heavy and the XP-120 is too big, and both give a very small increase over the XP-90 with a huge (comparatively) increase in cost.

You might want to wait until the 25th though.
 
how can the 64 3000+/3200+ overclock better than the 64 3700+,3800+, 4000+ when they are basically the same chip except for the mhz and the 4000+ with 1mb L2 cache. If the 64 3000+/3200+ can overclock on a 800mhz jump max, why couldn't the 3800+ or 4000+ do the same and max out at around 3.1-3.2 ghz (also an 800mhz jump)? Especially with the new 90nm venice cores, which run cooler, couldn't those overclock more than the original cores? (Aren't they clawhammer or something?) I plan to get a really good heatsink so...?
 
Nirad9er said:
how can the 64 3000+/3200+ overclock better than the 64 3700+,3800+, 4000+ when they are basically the same chip except for the mhz and the 4000+ with 1mb L2 cache. If the 64 3000+/3200+ can overclock on a 800mhz jump max, why couldn't the 3800+ or 4000+ do the same and max out at around 3.1-3.2 ghz (also an 800mhz jump)? Especially with the new 90nm venice cores, which run cooler, couldn't those overclock more than the original cores? (Aren't they clawhammer or something?) I plan to get a really good heatsink so...?
Click to expand...


It doesnt really work that way. Most 3000+/3200+ can get 800mhz (max, for air anyways) but that is because they are low speed chips to begin with. The San Diego cpu's (3700+, 4000+, FX55/7) are all higher clocked chips from the start, making it an unfair comparison. When it comes to pure ghz, the SD's seem to clock higher than the Venice cores, but when it comes to actual gains, the Venice is ahead due to its low stock speeds. Your not going to get an SD that does 3.1-3.2 on air. That is even stretching it on ewater. My 3700+ tops out stable at 2.8ghz on watr right now, but I am limited by this board to only 1.55v vcore. Seing as how my 3000+ whinny did 2.7ghz on water....that chip had a 900mhz gain while this one only has a 500mhz gain, but its still a higher overclocked and (due to the better core and 1mb cache) a faster CPU.

I did not read the thread, or even the last couple posts, but if there is a debate going on about whethar to get a 3000+/3200+ over a 3700+ or higher....i'd say get the 3700+ if you';ve got the cash, otehrwise a 30(2)00+ should do you fine.
 
ok, just one more question. I've pretty much narrowed my decision down to getting a 3800+ 90nm venice core, but should I go with the 3700+ venice at 2.2ghz that has the 1mb L2 cache or the 3800+ venice at 2.4ghz with 512k L2 cache. The 3800+ is 200mhz higher, but has less L2 cache than the 3700+. There isn't much of a price difference between the two cpu's, but which would be better? Would the 3700+ be able to overclock as high as the 3800+ cause if so i would get it because of the higher L2 cache. If the L2 cache isn't a big deal and mhz has a larger effect on the cpu performance then I'll get the 3800+ 90nm venice hoping it can overclock 200mhz higher than the 3700+ (going off that it is 200mhz higher stock speed over 3700+).
 
Since you're gonna OC anyhow, start out as low as possible within the same core i.e.-the slowest *stock speed* Venice/San Diego has just as good a chance of hitting 3 GHz as the fastest. If you're still shooting for 2.6 or so then motherboard is your only concern as virtually all the new A64's will do this on stock air cooling. *YMMV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top