Gillbot
Lifer
- Jan 11, 2001
- 28,830
- 17
- 81
Originally posted by: bfdd
Originally posted by: Gillbot
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: Gillbot
1.3875v, 4.005GHz, 445x9
I could probably tweak it more but it's running so i'll leave it. I am disappointed though as I was hoping for 500x8 at a minimum + maybe a lower vcore. Had I known this I would have definately gone for the 3.6-3.8+ oc on a quad core.
You are dissapointed getting a cutting-edge 4ghz Dual-core on air, that is within a safe Vcore range and temp for $190????? Holy smokes we are getting spoiled by Intel.
The FPS gain in Supcom is extremely minimal with a quad-core. As of this moment, quads are worthless for gamers. Id take a 4.0ghz dual over a 3.2 quad any day.
That video card is bottlenecking you more than anything. With good cards so cheap right now, I would handle that.
Yes, I am spoiled. I am less disappointed in the 4G number and more with the FSB limitation. I would have preferred the 4Ghz come in at 500x8 as opposed to the 445x9.
I disagree with the quad statement though. I had a chance to play with one and the gains were better with quad cores though I do know the video card is the primary bottleneck.
Mine does 500x8, maybe it's your mobo?
I am tired of repeating this.
IT IS NOT THE MOBO I just pulled out an E6550 that ran over 500fsb so I know for a FACT it is not the mobo.