^PENTIUM D^ CHEAP.........

[Spikey217]

Thanks OP. I bought one.

I went with the ASUS board @ newegg since it has AGP and DDR at a good price. This is a nice step up for me since I'm still running an AXP. I can keep my DDR1 RAM and 6800LE till my next upgrade. Not bad for $206.85.

 

[hans007]

well this is obviously not going to be the gaming champ. but compared to what else is out there for $135, this would be very good for multitasking.


if you could even get it to run at 667mhz bus (which is an even divider on most board) that would already be 3.33 ghz and be pretty decent.

 

[gsethi]

Originally posted by: hans007
well this is obviously not going to be the gaming champ. but compared to what else is out there for $135, this would be very good for multitasking.


if you could even get it to run at 667mhz bus (which is an even divider on most board) that would already be 3.33 ghz and be pretty decent.

It wouldnt be a gaming champ but would still be pretty decent for games. Pretty sure that this CPU can run all new games pretty decently with a decent video card.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: Zebo

Intel chipsets are still #1 stability

Why you say that? Sounds like urban legend to me. The stabilty testing I've seen at Toms and other places intel seems to crash a lot. Besides they recall whole chipsets a lot leading me to beleive something is seriously wrong with thier chipsets.

I think that xtknight summed it up best recently in the intel thread within gen hardware-

Originally posted by: xtknight
If it weren't for Intel's x86 CPUs, I doubt AMD would have any either. I'd still buy an Intel CPU+Intel Chipset for beginners. They are simply a more stable platform. In my experience, the nForce 4 isn't as stable either. VIA paled in comparison when it comes to stability. We won't even get into SiS. BSODs are rampant on my Athlon 64 system compared to my Pentium 4 one. Rampant, of course, is relative. nForce 4 IDE drivers are awful (NCQ corruption, BIOS incompatibilities causing BSODs). My Diamond Max 10 drive won't detect half of the time on boot-up. If I overclock 1 MHz in the BIOS, it refuses to POST whatsoever (at least it used to). Linux will not install without APIC disabled either. If Intel made chipsets for AMD CPUs, that would be like the second coming of Christ.

I greatly respect xtknight and seeing him post exactly my thoughts on Intel stability was good. In my experience, the Nforce2+ made AMD finally usable to a broad degree. Though I'd still agree with xtknight in that in ultimate stablility and compatiblility (ram ect).. Intel cant be beat.
Some Nforce4 links in response to people calling shens on Intel chipsets > AMD/NV Nforce

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=27&threadid=1796279&enterthread=y

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=29&threadid=1796428&enterthread=y

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=29&threadid=1771160&enterthread=y

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=29&threadid=1654288&enterthread=y

And its good to mention that while Intel might be the fastest all the time, they make the best mobile platform going, most of the older enthusiasts with a lot of experience would agree that Intel chipsets are still the most stable.
They make great stuff, theres no doubt.

Nvidia has been the best thing to ever happen to AMD. But as much as I recognize Nvidias superb engineering and support (in all their products), I'd be hard pressed to ever say that the leading AMD chipset (NF4) would typically top Intels efforts.

If there is ANY "urban legends" going around for any company, its AMD not Intel.. IMO even the performance advantage is given way too much of a blank check.
I think this thread and most of the reactions to this chip are testament to that blind eye that is frequently turned to Intel products.

And finally my rig is a A64 3200+ (venice), 7800GT, DFI SLI NF4, 1GB, 400GB Seagate 7200.9 RAID-0 ect and so on so no bias against AMD here at all. Just clear eyes and an open mind!
I'd build with this chip for myself without doubt, and its my low end budget pick.

Boy it's getting Deep in here. Nothing but annecdotes when 90% of people use AMD in here natually you're going to have more issues. Simple math & user error stats.

How many more times does Intel need to screw up or recall their chipsets (i820, MTH, Alterwood, grantsdale...) until you guys get the message? Toms could'nt even get PentuimD to Boot on two of intels very own 955X boards in that stress test where intel setups (they went though a bunch before finding something that was stable) crashed over 12 times!
Toms not the only one
http://www.motherboards.org/reviews/hardware/1513_3.html

Intel's 955 board that gave us nothing but a hard time right out of the gate.
We spent a week of our time just getting the board to even recognize their own damn CPU

As far as AMD not making thier chipset - they do! the north bridge is on die - open up everest if you have a A64 - it'll show you. "AMD Hammer IMC" north bridge.


It's no accident DDR clocks higher on AMD boards than DDR intel 875 etc boards - superior chipsets. Superior AMD north bridge.

In fact IMO there is actually no more effective endorsement of the stability and reliability of AMD chipsets than the fact that AnandTech uses them as the sole platform for the web serving of its main site, entrusting them with a loaded job that is tied to their own success as an enterprise. He's a computer expert and uses AMD.
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2136

Anyway it does'nt matter what I say to zealots... I can quote a thousand professional opinions of the most respected hardware sites in the universe; I can compare and contrast the driver support of both platforms; I can point out that no objective real world study has ever proven either platform more stable than the other; I can explain that the vast majority of competent computer resellers and consultants on these most educated forums have no problem ranking AMD equal with Intel in the reliability department. I can cite huge multinationals like Cray, HP, IBM etc building supercomputers and servers with AMD. I can cite processor rounups that show AMD achieving unheard of performance scores and in torture tests that put Pentium to shame.

But it won't matter. It's a pathology I'm dealing with here. Anyone so blinded by brand loyalty is basically beyond my ability to help him.

 

[nomagic]

Originally posted by: probzy
It's hot...

exactly! it is both hot as a deal and hot as a CPU.

 

[fire400]

BUMP _ LINK IS STILL UP

 

[kasia00]

sweet price!

 

[gsethi]

Ok guys update.

I got the CPU with the evga NF4 P4 motheboard. I havnt installed windows yet but did some POST tests. The CPU boots up at 667FSB @ default voltage and at 800FSB (4.0 GHz ) at +1mv. Again, these are just POST test results

I might not be able to get the actual stable overclockability tests for couple of weeks though. I dont find that much time nowadays (to reinstall windows and other programs) for my computer hobby

 

[Dweekie]

That's some nice results for dual core. I've actually hit a 2.66 p4 northwood up to 4ghz on default before. These intel processors seem to overclock great. The only problem seems to be controlling the heat and throttling. It's almost like in addition to the price/performance rating, overclocking maintenance swapped between the amd and intel processors as well. Rember all those special heatsink solutions required to overclock that 1.4ghz thunderbird to 1.7ghz, whereas the 1.6a p4's jumped to 2.1 with no effort? Nowadays, you just pop in a 3800+ dual core, clock it at 2.4ghz, and you're ready to go.

 

[Odeen]

Originally posted by: Dweekie
That's some nice results for dual core. I've actually hit a 2.66 p4 northwood up to 4ghz on default before. These intel processors seem to overclock great. The only problem seems to be controlling the heat and throttling. It's almost like in addition to the price/performance rating, overclocking maintenance swapped between the amd and intel processors as well. Rember all those special heatsink solutions required to overclock that 1.4ghz thunderbird to 1.7ghz, whereas the 1.6a p4's jumped to 2.1 with no effort? Nowadays, you just pop in a 3800+ dual core, clock it at 2.4ghz, and you're ready to go.

1.6a @ 2.13 is a 33% overclock
3800+ DC (2.0ghz) @ 2.4ghz is 20%
All things being equal, it's easier to get 20% extra out of the lower end of a given processor architecture than it is to get 33%.

That said, I miss the days where you could get a CPU comparable to the latest technology at an FSB lower than the maximum available. So, when you overclocked, you only pushed the CPU, not the motherboard and RAM as well. I.e. the Celeron 300A and 366A, which went 450-550mhz and were arguably faster than P2's of the same clock speed, while the BX chipset and PC100 RAM weren't strained one bit. Or even the very last batch of the 300A PPGA's that could reportedly hit 600mhz on i815 boards. The 1.6A was almost this good - i845D boards could handle 150mhz FSB, and i845E's were already specced for 133mhz, so 150 wasn't much of a stretch.

I'm hoping for a limited run of these on a 65nm process, just before Intel pulls the plug on the SKU altogether. If those chips can hit the 1066mhz FSB available on the latest boards, I'll be interested

 

[greenwar]

can anybody post their idle temp and load temp for this chip at stock voltage? Mine seems like 40C idle and 52C load at stock speed volts with SI-120 + 120mm panaflo full speed.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: greenwar
can anybody post their idle temp and load temp for this chip at stock voltage? Mine seems like 40C idle and 52C load at stock speed volts with SI-120 + 120mm panaflo full speed.

My 805 (at 2.8ghz) is about low 40's at idel and upper 40's at full use. that is in a house with the side of the case off and using the factory heatsink.