• 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.

Pentium D 805

Yeah this has been known for a while now. Alot of people are overclocking the snot out of these. Think its because of the high multiplyer or something like that.
 
Im thinking of buying this cpu to go in my old pc. I'd just oc' it loads and it be great. Ill wait and see what conroe prices are like and how far it drops the price of this cpu.
 
Got one for my wife couple weeks ago, and im actually jealous now as its such a good OC'er.
 
I just got one of these to play with before Conroe. With a P5LD2 it was a pretty cheap buy...in fact the Gskill ram i bought which i plan to carry over to Conroe was more expensive than the board and cpu combined :p

4.05ghz with 1.6v vcore. I can get it up to 3.8ghz stock volts, 3.9 with a minor voltage increase, and I have to crank the voltage up to get it stable at 4ghz.

With the board, for some reason i get slower hard drive performance compared to my AMD system, but then again i guess i get what i pay for. It also overvolts .05v idle and then drops .05v+ under load

a pic for those who care...


all in all, this cpu is fun to play with especially for my first intel cpu since the old 2.4c's. :D
 
WHat do you use to cool your processor? Also, did you overclock from the booster or from the bios?
 
prototype_sx said:
WHat do you use to cool your processor? Also, did you overclock from the booster or from the bios?
Click to expand...

thermalright xp-90c and a 92mm tornado. I started with the bios, but the board doesn't post with vcore higher than 1.55v so i just load into windows at 3.96ghz (20x198) with 1.55v and go from there.

edit: i also lapped the IHS
 
I bought 800 memory to go with this processor, would you recommend a fsb of 200 with a multiplier of 18? Thing is, though I have a zalman 9500 led to put on it, I live in jamaica and right now its VERY hot and I rather not force the temps up too high, but at the same time, oc'ing the fsb to 200 would allow me to use the memory at 800 rather than a lower 667 or whatever. What do you think? What are your max temps btw?
 
PureBooYah - how does it compare to your 146 @ 3.0 Ghz though?
 
prototype_sx said:
I bought 800 memory to go with this processor, would you recommend a fsb of 200 with a multiplier of 18? Thing is, though I have a zalman 9500 led to put on it, I live in jamaica and right now its VERY hot and I rather not force the temps up too high, but at the same time, oc'ing the fsb to 200 would allow me to use the memory at 800 rather than a lower 667 or whatever. What do you think? What are your max temps btw?
Click to expand...

I dont think you can change the multiplier of this cpu. And my temps are 44c idle and 62c load. Although it's not nearly as humid or hot in Michigan as it was a few days ago so my temps aren't as high as they were before (55c idle, 65-70c load). Sad thing is I lapped my IHS after turning on the air during those hot days, so i don't know how much the lapping helped temps.


dnottis said:
PureBooYah - how does it compare to your 146 @ 3.0 Ghz though?
Click to expand...

well, it's slower. But I'm not sure if it's because the hard drive performance with this motherboard is slower or because of the cpu. Windows, for example, takes about 1-2 minutes to load with this setup compared to the 20-25 seconds of the opteron setup. Another example is superpi 32m, this cpu took about 39min while the opteron took 28min. Games also have a little bit longer load time, but not too much. Any other daily task performance the same.
 
PureBooYah said:
well, it's slower. But I'm not sure if it's because the hard drive performance with this motherboard is slower or because of the cpu. Windows, for example, takes about 1-2 minutes to load with this setup compared to the 20-25 seconds of the opteron setup. Another example is superpi 32m, this cpu took about 39min while the opteron took 28min. Games also have a little bit longer load time, but not too much. Any other daily task performance the same.
Click to expand...


Thanks - I ask because I have a 3.0 Ghz opty 148 that I was considering switching out for a 930 and trying to OC. From what I have seen though in gaming it wouldnt be faster and I appreciate your confirmation on that. Guess I will wait for Conroe.
 
prototype_sx said:
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/intel805d/13.html

It says there that the multiplier is adjustable
Click to expand...
Page one of that review says "Intel was kind enough to send us a sample of the D 805" and i'm going to guess it's an ES.

This is a retail D 805 (ignore the Processor Selection and voltage):
CPU-Z.gif


The retail processor comes locked at 20x, not even with a speedstep multiplier unlocked like the 830 (or 930) and higher models have.
 
You can change the multi if the motherboard supports it. P5ND2 Deluxe is one that I know off the top of my head (non-deluxe model can NOT change multi).
 
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVI said:
You can change the multi if the motherboard supports it and the CPU has unlocked multipliers.
Click to expand...
fixed.
 
dnottis said:
Thanks - I ask because I have a 3.0 Ghz opty 148 that I was considering switching out for a 930 and trying to OC. From what I have seen though in gaming it wouldnt be faster and I appreciate your confirmation on that. Guess I will wait for Conroe.
Click to expand...

fixed my harddrive problems, apparently my board has a bad SATA port or something. I ran HDTach with my raptor in one of the red SATA ports and it's read burst speed was 3.6 MB/s (not a typo). I switched it to the second red SATA port (which for some reason required me to reinstall windows because my drive wasn't being detected) and now i'm up to 124 MB/s. Fixed a lot of my speed issues obviously, but games do still load a little slower or just as fast as my opty.
 
What kind of heatsink do you use? That's a nice temp with the extra 130W that the 805 uses at 4+ Ghz.

PureBooYah said:
I just got one of these to play with before Conroe. With a P5LD2 it was a pretty cheap buy...in fact the Gskill ram i bought which i plan to carry over to Conroe was more expensive than the board and cpu combined :p

4.05ghz with 1.6v vcore. I can get it up to 3.8ghz stock volts, 3.9 with a minor voltage increase, and I have to crank the voltage up to get it stable at 4ghz.

With the board, for some reason i get slower hard drive performance compared to my AMD system, but then again i guess i get what i pay for. It also overvolts .05v idle and then drops .05v+ under load

a pic for those who care...


all in all, this cpu is fun to play with especially for my first intel cpu since the old 2.4c's. :D
Click to expand...
 
Weazmeister said:
What kind of heatsink do you use? That's a nice temp with the extra 130W that the 805 uses at 4+ Ghz.
Click to expand...

xp-90c with a 92mm tornado and a lapped IHS
 
Nice...did you have to remove the mobo for the install of the XP90c? I assume you would have, right?
 
Weazmeister said:
Nice...did you have to remove the mobo for the install of the XP90c? I assume you would have, right?
Click to expand...

yeah, you would have to, but i never had the mobo in the case before i put mine on.
 
Weazmeister said:
What kind of heatsink do you use? That's a nice temp with the extra 130W that the 805 uses at 4+ Ghz.
Click to expand...
The picture he posted was taken at idle (0% utilization on both cores). I don't know if the 150MHz final bump is worth so much extra voltage and power.

The voltage and clock speed scaling suggest a 110W max power increase at 100% load on both cores. The extra power isn't necessarily fixed when running at 4GHz+. If someone were able to run a D 805 at 4GHz with stock voltage, it would use 62W less power than at 1.6v (204W vs 142W... there is also extra power lost in the voltage regulators and inside the PSU). The data sheet has a maximum voltage spec of 1.55v.
 
pxc said:
The picture he posted was taken at idle (0% utilization on both cores). I don't know if the 150MHz final bump is worth so much extra voltage and power.

The voltage and clock speed scaling suggest a 110W max power increase at 100% load on both cores. The extra power isn't necessarily fixed when running at 4GHz+. If someone were able to run a D 805 at 4GHz with stock voltage, it would use 62W less power than at 1.6v (204W vs 142W... there is also extra power lost in the voltage regulators and inside the PSU). The data sheet has a maximum voltage spec of 1.55v.
Click to expand...

Nobody is hitting 4Ghz at stock voltage. And multiple reviews have seen over 110W max increase. Here's one that comes to mind. 37C at idle is still pretty amazing for a good overclock.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/page14.html
 
Weazmeister said:
Nobody is hitting 4Ghz at stock voltage. And multiple reviews have seen over 110W max increase. Here's one that comes to mind. 37C at idle is still pretty amazing for a good overclock.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/page14.html
Click to expand...
You missed the point. I was using a simple example to explain that power also varies by voltage, not just speed.

THG increased voltage to 1.675v vs 1.600v that PureBooYah used. Power scaling on a CPU is roughly proportional to voltage squared and linear to speed. All other things being equal, THG's CPU will use more power just from the higher voltage (roughly by 20W). Get it now?
 
Ummm, you're still missing the point :) THG showed 220W increase @ 1.675v, vs we don't know how much at 1.6v by PBY. however your initial observation of 110W max is incorrect as it's off by about 90W, which was my point, get it now?
 
Weazmeister said:
Ummm, you're still missing the point :) THG showed 220W increase @ 1.675v, vs we don't know how much at 1.6v by PBY. however your initial observation of 110W max is incorrect as it's off by about 90W, which was my point, get it now?
Click to expand...
Please read the sentence. I'll make it simpler this time: "110W max power increase"

Understand now? And I just explained how to roughly extrapolate power. :p

edit: I am only giving the power consumed by the CPU, not the losses at the voltage regulators or power conversion efficiency in the PSU. For example, VRs on the motherboard might convert DC-DC at 90% efficiency (total load of 100W to the PSU for each 90W supplied to the CPU). And the PSU has further losses, typically consuming 100W for each 75W provided to system devices. So a 110W increase in CPU load can increase power from the wall by over 150W.
 
pxc said:
Please read the sentence. I'll make it simpler this time: "110W max power increase"

Understand now? And I just explained how to roughly extrapolate power. :p

edit: I am only giving the power consumed by the CPU, not the losses at the voltage regulators or power conversion efficiency in the PSU. For example, VRs on the motherboard might convert DC-DC at 90% efficiency (total load of 100W to the PSU for each 90W supplied to the CPU). And the PSU has further losses, typically consuming 100W for each 75W provided to system devices. So a 110W increase in CPU load can increase power from the wall by over 150W.
Click to expand...

Ummm, you still don't get it. 110W increase MAX as you stated can lead to 150W give or take 10%. at the wall YOUR STILL OFF BY 55W. 55W is a substantial amount of power, I am sure even YOU will get that. "Talking down" to people doesn't do you any good especially when your math doesn't add up. The 70W change is NOT just a function of the transfer, no matter how much resistance, how much impeadance, how much loss, and how much "creative math" you come up with. I would take an argument that the measuring wasn't done in a very scientific fashion, right, but c'mon if you're going to try to impress with numbers, add them up first.

Anyhow, added to ignore list for adding nothing useful to a thread. Go crap on another thread.
 
PureBooYah said:
yeah, you would have to, but i never had the mobo in the case before i put mine on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I am still debating which heatsink I am going to go with. Right now running it on the Intel box hsf. Haven't found a good review with a 775 on the NinjaP, which is what I am leaning towards right now, but that idle/load temp looks pretty damn good w/ the XP90c. Oh the choices :)
 
The box cooler is absolutely terrible, it just barely cools the cpu at stock speeds and the fan is very annoying. Heck, my northwood came with a better box cooler, I ended up gettin the wife the AC Freezer 7 pro, works 1000 times better and my ears dont hurt anymore :D
 
Ohh.. I'm about to assemble my 805D system when I get home tonight.. got a P5WD2-E premium MB.. XP-120 cooler... should be nice..



Oh.. question - this is a 64bit cpu, right? Should I be using win xp 64bit?
 
Danith said:
Ohh.. I'm about to assemble my 805D system when I get home tonight.. got a P5WD2-E premium MB.. XP-120 cooler... should be nice..



Oh.. question - this is a 64bit cpu, right? Should I be using win xp 64bit?
Click to expand...

I am no expert on this question.... but I think many people opt NOT to use the 64 bit version of XP- mainly due to the fact that there are too many driver issues. This may be getting better and the problem will probably go away eventually, but for now it can be a pain (from what I have read).
 
kilgore777 said:
I am no expert on this question.... but I think many people opt NOT to use the 64 bit version of XP- mainly due to the fact that there are too many driver issues. This may be getting better and the problem will probably go away eventually, but for now it can be a pain (from what I have read).
Click to expand...


XP64 sux. Wait for Vista, for now use XP 32.
 
dnottis said:
XP64 sux. Wait for Vista, for now use XP 32.
Click to expand...

Exactly. XP64 is a hack that MS has seemed to not fully support thus far. And unless you are running a server or high end science apps, you won't see any difference. 64 bit was just a dirty AMD marketing ploy that Intel matched to keep up with those who just look at numbers, it does no good to the average or even average high end user. (Unless you want to use more than 4 gigs of ram for some god-forsaken reason)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top