I have an IC7-MAX3 with some OCZ 4200 EL (2.5-4-4-7) and nearly everything else ordered, the question is do I go for the 2.6c or the 2.8c??? EDIT: I'll also be watercooling.
the 2.8 will allow you a higher CPU speed, but the 2.6 will give much higher FSB's... not a P4 man.. but would say the 2.6...
Much higher? not sure about that with watercooling and the RAM I have (DDR533) would imagine I am going to get pretty close to the maximum FSB of either chip, I am just wondering which is most likely to top out first? I have heard that the 2.4c and 2.8c have been the best OCers, but am not sure how true this is. I ruled the 2.4 out as it is now the same price as the 2.6, just can't decided if it is worth the extra £30 for the 2.8
It might still be better to get the 2.4, the reason that you can get a higher potential FSB is because the multiplier is locked. With lower-clocked chips, the multiplier is locked at a lower value, so that if you assume that all the chips in a range (2.4 to 3.2, for example) will clock to about the same, which they will due to the way the manufacturing process works (higher spec chips are usually just overclocked versions of the same die, possibly slightly higher quality in order to get the required speed at stock voltage), then with a lower multiplier you will be able to raise the FSB more before you hit the limit of the chip. For example, let's just say that you will be able to get a max FSB of 275 (DDR 550) with your memory, and that the maximum OC you will be able to get is 3.3GHz. With a 2.4c, multiplier 12, you will hit 3.3GHz exactly (12x275), but with a 2.6c, multiplier 13, you would have to underclock the RAM to about 254MHz, otherwise you'd go over the (theoretical) limit on the chip and it wouldn't work. With a 2.8c, 3.3GHz only requires 236FSB. It all depends on what the maximum overclock is likely to be on the chip, which then depends on your cooling as well as a bit of luck, and how high you expect to be able to clock the RAM. Looking around, 275-285 seems a reasonable target, so you need to do sums of your own I hope I haven't confused things further, but these are factors you need to consider. A 2.8 chip isn't necessarily going to be better for you than a plain old 2.4.
Hi Kameleon Thanks for that reply, not confusing at all, had all that worked out really, am just looking for opinions on the potiential OC of the chips. From what I have seen on water a lot of the Pentium 4c chips top out around 3.6 to 3.8, hence the dilemma... 2.6 @ 3.6 = 277FSB 2.6 @ 3.8 = 292FSB 2.8 @ 3.6 = 257FSB 2.8 @ 3.8 = 271 FSB So if my chip can get to 3.8 the 2.6 is going to be really overclocking the RAM, whereas 3.8 with the 2.8 may have a little headroom left... and the 4cs have been known on occasion to get up to 4GHz on water I just can't decide at the mo, what are other OCers experience of maximum Pentium 4c OCs? Also the benefit of the OCZ 4200EL Memory is that you can really tighten up the timings as you start to underclock, it has been tested at CAS2 at 200MHz EDIT : Just some bad English
becasue the 2.8 has a higher multi, the cooling/chip will top out as said in the previous post at about 3.6.... so with the 2.8 the FSB will be lower to give this speed than the 2.6... meaning less mem bandwidth.......
go for the 2.8, the lower fsb will slow it a bit, but if you can tighten the timings enough, it should be well worth it. my 2.8 does 3.5 without even breaking a sweat. (5/4 ram divider tho, ram wont do >205-210)
Hi Xen0phobiak Thanks for that, I think I have decided to go for the 2.8, but they are now currently out of stock, and I was hoping to build this weekend Just one question, is 3.5 that on air or water? Of course, I could always wait for the 2.8 Prescott in February Anyone know if the IC7-Max3 supports it?
i've done 3.5 on air with the retail (all alu version) heatsink. and with my aero 4. good innit? EDIT : i got mine from here: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Intel_CPUs_15.html and they are in stock. the ic7-max3 will support the prescott cpu's before they change the form factor. we've had james_preedy's 3.0 to 3.6odd on air, he's only got a 350w psu though so he's pushing it.
Right I'm convinced I'm getting the 2.8, I'll have to wait to get it though as I am buying a few things at once, changing to overclockers for the CPU would mean also changing for XP Pro OEM. with those two and the extra postage, it would cost me nearly £20 more And I still have this little voice at the back of my head saying "Prescott! Prescott!" Did some digging around and they are due out on February 2nd, so close and yet so far when I have nearly all the other bits for me new PC sitting in my room Of course overclocking potential is unknown at present too Xen0phbiak, what do you reckon to the SLZ65 version of the 2.8, I'm thinking not worth the extra dough. PS Overclockers are taking pre-orders for the 2.8 Prescott for £158.63, cheaper than the 2.8c
Im not the one to ask for steppings sorry. try asking here or wait until another bit-techer helps out. As to thte prescott, the main reason it was held back was due to heat issues with the 0.9u manufacturing process. I would take teh 2.8 because its a "known" quantity. It'll be 3-4 weeks before people really know what the prescott's like. as soon as you buy one they'll release the better one for btx boards only. This may help tell you which stepping i have, but i dont know how to convert between the 2 formats. sorry m8
You can tell which you have as the SLZ65 is part of one of the codes on top of the chip... ... of course that will currently be under your heatsink
i know that, but i really really cba to do that, its a pain to pull my pc out from where it is. If you allready have the ic7max3 you will see that the otes system does not make for easy heatsink removal either, then we move on to the arctic silver. Just pulled out the retail box for it: Product code BX80532pg2800dsl6wt so im guessing SL6WT Packdate 07/24/03
I was never suggesting that you actually remove your heatsink! Just pulling out your retail box was above and beyond the call of duty I am now pretty convinced that the SLZ65 is not worth the extra Thanks for all your help
