Very impressed with Pentium D 920 Overclocking! Pentium D 920 (2.8Ghz@4.0Ghz)

[Golgatha]

For the record, I"m no fanboy. Just thought I'd post the nice potential of the 900 series for anyone who is interested...my laptop runs AMD .

 

[compgeek89]

good lappy

 

[Ichigo]

His CPU is $200. The cheapest AMD dual core is not.

 

[robertk2012]

Originally posted by: Ichigo
His CPU is $200. The cheapest AMD dual core is not.

exactly

 

[robertk2012]

Originally posted by: compgeek89
An Opteron 165 is $270

Yeah and your point is? That it costs at least 35% more.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Golgatha
I feel like I'm back in the days of overclocking the Celeron 300A except I get a 2for1 deal and don't have to settle for less L2 cache (or no cache at all).

The stock clock on my Pentium D 920 is 2.8Ghz, and right now I'm running 12hr Folding@Home + Prime95, and 7hr+ 3DMark 2005 looping (1280x960, 4xAA, 8xAF) stable at 4.0Ghz! Had to increase voltage to 1.365V and am using a Zalman 7700Cu with AS5. Max temp I have seen is about 64°C when running everything I can think of to tax it at once. When just running normal desktop apps and Folding@Home (typical) it can't even break 53°C, which is lower than my 3.6Ghz@4.01Ghz P4 660 I was running. This 65nm tech has really impressed me. A $200 CPU should not run this well, but you won't hear me complaining if Intel wants to dish out greater than $1,000 performance for 20% of the price.

Nice overclock. My only question is what motherboard did you use? I'm hoping you managed to find an inexpensive one that still overclocks well. I tried 5 motherboards and 2 920's and couldn't get passed 3.7ghz. The only good overclocks seem to happen on the Asus P5WD2 premium and P5WD2-E premium, so if you are using a less expensive motherboard, I would love to know.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: Golgatha
I feel like I'm back in the days of overclocking the Celeron 300A except I get a 2for1 deal and don't have to settle for less L2 cache (or no cache at all).

The stock clock on my Pentium D 920 is 2.8Ghz, and right now I'm running 12hr Folding@Home + Prime95, and 7hr+ 3DMark 2005 looping (1280x960, 4xAA, 8xAF) stable at 4.0Ghz! Had to increase voltage to 1.365V and am using a Zalman 7700Cu with AS5. Max temp I have seen is about 64°C when running everything I can think of to tax it at once. When just running normal desktop apps and Folding@Home (typical) it can't even break 53°C, which is lower than my 3.6Ghz@4.01Ghz P4 660 I was running. This 65nm tech has really impressed me. A $200 CPU should not run this well, but you won't hear me complaining if Intel wants to dish out greater than $1,000 performance for 20% of the price.

Nice overclock. My only question is what motherboard did you use? I'm hoping you managed to find an inexpensive one that still overclocks well. I tried 5 motherboards and 2 920's and couldn't get passed 3.7ghz. The only good overclocks seem to happen on the Asus P5WD2 premium and P5WD2-E premium, so if you are using a less expensive motherboard, I would love to know.

Actually, I purchased the 920 with a Asus P5WD2 premium on the FS/FT forums to try out Crossfire. I have an Enermax Liberty 620w power supply also, which has an 8pin CPU load bearing cable on it, so I have plenty of power and a nice motherboard running this setup.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: compgeek89
good lappy

Yes it is. For the price point I was looking at, it was either a Sempron or Celeron. So let me think about this...power consumption and performance equal to a Pentium M at Sempron prices. It was an easy decision.

After my upgrades, I have a mobile Sempron 2800+, 7200rpm Hitachi 80GB, 1GB RAM, and DVD burner for about $700 after selling off the old parts. Might get ambitious and swap out the CPU for a ML series Turion if I can find one used, but the Sempron is more than adequate for working on research in the laboratory. Pulls duty as a Folding@Home box while I'm not in the lab too . On that note, I just got the command line version of Folding@Home running on each of my cores now. I've come to really like Anandtech forums, so I decided to switch teams to 198 (Anandtech).

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: compgeek89
My Opteron 165, which was $350 is getting a 1200mhz OC (1800 -> 3000) which is a 66% OC and it mutilates any intel dual core, even at 5ghz.


True true, but over at XS Im seeing so many 55%+ OCs on 165s that it would take a lot to impress me with an Intel.

I'm pretty sure a Core Duo (Yonah) at 3Ghz, much less than 5Ghz, will wreck it. Go look on XS and see Yonah's hitting 3Ghz on stock air cooling.

Originally posted by: compgeek89
An Opteron 165 is $270

No its not. Cheapest is around $320. Pentium-D 920 (or ironically the 930 is actually a little cheaper) is around $210. It's about 50% more expensive.

 

[ajikan]

nice.
I got it to 4.1Ghz stable when I had it.
used a TT Big Typhoon with it.

 

[F1shF4t]

Nice overclock!

Originally posted by: compgeek89
Well, its a nice OC, but the performance reeks compared to an AMD X2 @ 2.5-2.6ghz, so no one is really impressed by the performance he's getting out of it.

I JUST DONT UNDERSTAND why someone buys an Intel Dual Core

Why well cause its cheap!!! Now with how cheap the Pentium D go its great for people who want to get a dual core.


For people who dont overclock or want an easy upgrade cycle the Pd cpus are a brillian choice due to price and also paired with a mainboard which can support conroe in the future, then u just switch the cpus over. (very similar to socket 939 users change to dualcore, just switch cpus, that how i got my dually )

 

[LTC8K6]

I have bought Intel all along and will continue to do so.

What about it?

Want to argue that AMD is faster? They sure are!

Want to argue that even before dual cores AMD was both faster and cheaper? They sure were!

Want to argue that AMD runs cooler and uses less power? They sure do!

Okay, you win the argument. AMD is pretty much better all around and has been for quite a while.

I am off to build yet another great Intel system, though.
Not waiting for Conroe, either. When it's available, it will just be the next Intel chip.
Just like all the rest have been.

Heck, AMD even sponsors my favorite race team!

Should other folks buy Intel over AMD? I can't see why they would, but that is up to each person. I have no problem with AMD chips and would never tell someone not to use them.

Even when Conroe comes out, I will not try to be an Intel salesman.

Buy and use what you like, makes no difference to me.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
Nice overclock!

Originally posted by: compgeek89
Well, its a nice OC, but the performance reeks compared to an AMD X2 @ 2.5-2.6ghz, so no one is really impressed by the performance he's getting out of it.

I JUST DONT UNDERSTAND why someone buys an Intel Dual Core

Why well cause its cheap!!! Now with how cheap the Pentium D go its great for people who want to get a dual core.


For people who dont overclock or want an easy upgrade cycle the Pd cpus are a brillian choice due to price and also paired with a mainboard which can support conroe in the future, then u just switch the cpus over. (very similar to socket 939 users change to dualcore, just switch cpus, that how i got my dually )

Please show me where these fabled motherboards exist. The only one I've found is the 304 revision of the Intel 975X based board, which I haven't seen on store shelves yet. I'll probably wait out for the next chipset or two before going with Conroe. Might just keep on waiting, as I've found dual core at 4Ghz to be pretty zippy for anything I do anyway.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
I have bought Intel all along and will continue to do so.

What about it?

Want to argue that AMD is faster? They sure are!

Want to argue that even before dual cores AMD was both faster and cheaper? They sure were!

Want to argue that AMD runs cooler and uses less power? They sure do!

Okay, you win the argument. AMD is pretty much better all around and has been for quite a while.

I am off to build yet another great Intel system, though.
Not waiting for Conroe, either. When it's available, it will just be the next Intel chip.
Just like all the rest have been.

Heck, AMD even sponsors my favorite race team!

Should other folks buy Intel over AMD? I can't see why they would, but that is up to each person. I have no problem with AMD chips and would never tell someone not to use them.

Even when Conroe comes out, I will not try to be an Intel salesman.

Buy and use what you like, makes no difference to me.

OK, this is the biggest fanboy post I have seen (that isn't an outright lie, he tells the truth here)

Why then do you buy Intel ? I really don't understand ? BTW, I just got the 805 bundle from Fry's to see what all the talk was about. It won;t run over 2.66 with the retail HSF, even in a 55F room with the case cover off without shutting down (the motherboard does that when it hits 70C and I can't turn it off) It idles at 40c, but when I load both cores, it goes ballistic, and its load to boot ! I should have known better, but I was listening to all the fanboys, and had to see for myself.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: EndGame

Originally posted by: compgeek89
My Opteron 165, which was $350 is getting a 1200mhz OC (1800 -> 3000) which is a 66% OC and it mutilates any intel dual core, even at 5ghz.

Point being, sure these Pentium Ds are doing alright, but you can get more performance and a better OC out of AMD X2s/Opterons, there's still no reason to go Intel until conroe.

No, that's still not the point the guy was making..........

Tell ya what, changed Pent. D 920 to any A64 chip and the guy would be getting "good job" or "nice OC"............but, because he happened to acheive his 40% O/C with a P D 920 it's turned into an Intel/AMD thread..............:roll:

so true. It's called threadcrapping

 

[v8envy]

Ok, AMD > Intel in benchmarks. Now, show me how to underclock the 3800 x2's price to $200 and I'll be impressed.

AMD is great for e-peen comparisons. But the $200 Intel chips are plenty of performance for gaming and other tasks (after a mild overclock). With a whole core left over for future proofing.

The car comparison is more like, 'why would anyone buy a miata when they can have a Z3?' And in the case of my wife the answer is: you can use close to 100% of the miata all year long, but with the Z3 you wind up wasting potential most of the time. Thus, the miata is a better overall everyday value, and that's why we had one. She didn't feel a larger carpeen was worth several 10s of K of her money.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: v8envy
Ok, AMD > Intel in benchmarks. .

Actualy you have it backwards, Pentium-D's win in a lot of synthetic benchmarks but tend to lag behind in real world apps. Overclocked to 4ghz, a pentium-d will perform similar to an X2 or Yonah @ 2.4-2.5ghz. The newer revisions of X2 are typicaly hitting 2.7-2.9ghz, and doing so on less expensive motherboards. P5WD2 premium + Pentium-D 920 ~$400, X2 3800+ low cost but still good for overclocking motherboard ~$400. But the X2 overclocks easier, and the P4 has to overclock farther to hit the same performance levels. Check my sig, I have both, I've gone through 4 pentium-d's and 5 motherboards trying to match the performance of my X2 @2.618ghz, and they just can't do it while staying cost effective.

 

[LTC8K6]

Sorry, not a fanboy at all, never badmouthed AMD, never recommended Intel over AMD as far as I can remember.

I am truly mystified at the supposed need to explain why I like to use one brand of CPU/Chipset.

It really amazes me that I am expected to justify how I choose to spend my own hard earned money.

Hondas are way better than Chevys and Fords, no doubt about it.

However, I like Chevys and Fords, with a preference for Chevy.

It's not even a "buy Amercian" thing really. That means nothing anymore anyway.

I did rent a 2006 Grand Cherokee 4X4 for a week, and I loved it. Drove it about 1200 miles. No complaints. It was nice, I wouldn't mind owning one.

I also have no complaints about the AMD systems I have built and used.

How does my personal preference for Intel diminish AMD anyway?

It reminds me of the flunkie at Waldenbooks trying to get me to sign up for their preferred buyer card. I told her that I would sign up for one, but didn't want to use it. I never saw such a confused look in my life. She looked like somebody hit her with a bat!

I explained that having the card already would stop the 5 minute spiel about it every time I bought a book, and not using it prevented the data gathering they wanted to do.

She just didn't get it.....

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: v8envy
Ok, AMD > Intel in benchmarks. .

Actualy you have it backwards, Pentium-D's win in a lot of synthetic benchmarks but tend to lag behind in real world apps. Overclocked to 4ghz, a pentium-d will perform similar to an X2 or Yonah @ 2.4-2.5ghz. The newer revisions of X2 are typicaly hitting 2.7-2.9ghz, and doing so on less expensive motherboards. P5WD2 premium + Pentium-D 920 ~$400, X2 3800+ low cost but still good for overclocking motherboard ~$400. But the X2 overclocks easier, and the P4 has to overclock farther to hit the same performance levels. Check my sig, I have both, I've gone through 4 pentium-d's and 5 motherboards trying to match the performance of my X2 @2.618ghz, and they just can't do it while staying cost effective.

QFT

 

[Regs]

That's one hell of an overclock. I'm a modest overclocker to say the least. Pushing the envelope on overclocking means spending money on a good cooling system. Something I fail to see the logic in. It basically means that you want to push whatever you can out of a CPU without killing it instantlly.

It's a good over clock, however you might run into instability in the future.

 

[robertk2012]

Originally posted by: Regs
That's one hell of an overclock. I'm a modest overclocker to say the least. Pushing the envelope on overclocking means spending money on a good cooling system. Something I fail to see the logic in. It basically means that you want to push whatever you can out of a CPU without killing it instantlly.

It's a good over clock, however you might run into instability in the future.

Who the heck is this guy?

I have more power than a $1000 processor yet only spent less than $300.

 

[compgeek89]

I have more power than next winter's $1200 CPU (The FX-64) and I only spent $350

 

[Absolute0]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Sad part is, it gets outperformed by an X2 4400. The X2 does cost a bit more tho.

Yay let's turn this into a 210$ Intel versus 460$ AMD battle :disgust:

@ OP good overclock on aircooling, good bang for your buck
(My roommate just got an 805D and clocked to 3.8 Ghz on air , it was the first time i had recommended Intel in a while but we're happy with it )

 

[compgeek89]

Originally posted by: Absolute0

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Sad part is, it gets outperformed by an X2 4400. The X2 does cost a bit more tho.

Yay let's turn this into a 210$ Intel versus 460$ AMD battle :disgust:

On a $50 mobo vs a $200 mobo though, suddenly that gap is much smaller.

 

[Absolute0]

That is so exaggerated it's just pathetic
P5LD2 is 117$ and DFI NF4 Ultra-D is the same price, both overclock pretty well...

Anyway, the point of my original post was that it's pathetic how someone showing off their overclock has turned into blatant Intel bashing. The last 3 years have spawned a generation of super AMD fanboys. I've owned 20 AMD 64s and like 1 P4 and i'm not so mean and arrogant on the issue... : /