Who is exicited about 975X

savantu said:
If Intel delivers a 3.2Ghz Conroe and a 3.33Ghz Conroe XE in Q3 2k6 , AMD's in for a nice doomsday party....


:eek: :eek: :eek: ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, they are, if they don't release a new product in the next 9 months.

How do you know a 3.2GHz Conroe would beat a K8? We know next to nothing about Conroe.
 
Well, if they've managed to get a P6 derivative dual-core (which is what Conroe is rumoured to be based on, kind of like Dothan/Merom, but better) past 3Ghz, consider the X2 creamed.
 
steviep said:
Well, if they've managed to get a P6 derivative dual-core (which is what Conroe is rumoured to be based on, kind of like Dothan/Merom, but better) past 3Ghz, consider the X2 creamed.
Click to expand...

The assumption being that AMD doesn't have anything up their sleeve either :rolleyes: . I'm interested to see what AMD rolls out for AM2. Maybe the playing field will be somewhat level for the first time since P3/T-bird.
 
Flak Pyro said:
This roadmap was posted on another forum

inteldcroadmap3sn.gif
Click to expand...
I am not too sure... but

If this is real... I would totally throw down another grand for the conroe XE chip
 
steviep said:
Well, if they've managed to get a P6 derivative dual-core (which is what Conroe is rumoured to be based on, kind of like Dothan/Merom, but better) past 3Ghz, consider the X2 creamed.
Click to expand...
err... conroe is just merom on the desktop... its directly based on Merom, which is the "mother" of intel's entire next gen.
 
Well , at least we have a pretty clear ideea of what AMD will ship next year :

FX60 2.6Ghz dual core january -> FX xx 3Ghz at best /1333 in Q4 according to Charlie...
X2 2.66Ghz/1333 when M2 ships...I doubt it will reach 3Ghz in 90nm , close to impossible I'd say.

Now , a Yonah is on par with an X2 , Merom and Conroe should be way faster clock for clock.

If Intel launches a 3.2Ghz Conroe for the masses in Q3 guess what....AMD will need at least 3.4Ghz dual core to stay in the game...And I highly doubt they're gonna pull such a rabbit out of the hat this year...Maybe even in 65nm ( they are having big problems with it apparently ) it will be troublesome....
 
Poncho said:
975 WILL work with SLI, you just need the right drivers.
Click to expand...

I was hoping to hear this. I read the new Gigabyte board comes with an SLI bracket. Does anyone have onfo about one with the ASUS board?

Do you know anyone who has used SLI with a 975? If so can you link a download for the drivers.
 
Grader said:
I was hoping to hear this. I read the new Gigabyte board comes with an SLI bracket. Does anyone have onfo about one with the ASUS board?

Do you know anyone who has used SLI with a 975? If so can you link a download for the drivers.
Click to expand...

I've seen 2 7800go's (pretty much the same as a desktop card, with more output options) in the gigabyte board, using older drivers IIRC and they worked like a charm. I've not seen it work on an ASUS board, but they all should work with the right drivers.
 
I really like that roadmap except I was planing on the 975X chipset shortly and just a cheap P4 650 to hold me over till Conroe but that Conroe extreme addition is got a faster FSB than the 975x 1066 so now I have to wait it out . I have been so patient in waiting for Conroe but I guess I can wait . AMD is going to be so pawned. Ya I don't know what AMD has coming . I really don't care Rambus XDR won't even save them this time around. Buy the time amd does have an ans. CSI well be here on Intel.
 
$BangforThe$ said:
I really like that roadmap except I was planing on the 975X chipset shortly and just a cheap P4 650 to hold me over till Conroe but that Conroe extreme addition is got a faster FSB than the 975x 1066 so now I have to wait it out . I have been so patient in waiting for Conroe but I guess I can wait . AMD is going to be so pawned. Ya I don't know what AMD has coming . I really don't care Rambus XDR won't even save them this time around. Buy the time amd does have an ans. CSI well be here on Intel.
Click to expand...

Rambus XDR for AMD? What the hell are you talking about? AMD will be using DDR2.
 
Ya I heard that they were going to use DDR2 and thats what I thought. But AMD just signed A deal with Rambus for 75million.So who really knows . Intel already has a deal in place with Rambus if its still in effect, But 75 million from AMD hell that might be more money than AMD has made in all the years they been around.
 
$BangforThe$ said:
I really like that roadmap except I was planing on the 975X chipset shortly and just a cheap P4 650 to hold me over till Conroe but that Conroe extreme addition is got a faster FSB than the 975x 1066 so now I have to wait it out . I have been so patient in waiting for Conroe but I guess I can wait . AMD is going to be so pawned. Ya I don't know what AMD has coming . I really don't care Rambus XDR won't even save them this time around. Buy the time amd does have an ans. CSI well be here on Intel.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing though, you can always "overclock" the EE Conroe to get it to 1333 FSB if the board has overclocking abilities. If you put that processor (EE) into the board it'll keep the multiplier the same but move the FSB down to 266, lowering the speed as well. Now, if you bump that FSB up to 333..... it'll increase the speed to default rating. You SHOULD be able to do that with a good Asus board I would imagine. Does that make sense?
 
Yes it does make since . But if I spend $1000+ on a cpu i want the M/B FSb = to the Cpu FSB so that when I dump up the fsb I will increase both FSB and CPU Freq.
This will be the last PC I ever build for myself so I am going to go all out and I want all my parts matched ViiV man. Can you imagine what this thing well cost me water cooled everthing custom built case 4 raptorX HD raid 5 dual R600's no this is my last one and i am going to do it right . I figure the custom painting is going to be $1000+ Blu ray another $700to$800 I see $7500+ thats my cost. Oled keyboard what that going to run $200
30" LCD

Ya its my last PC
 
robberbaron said:
Rambus XDR for AMD? What the hell are you talking about? AMD will be using DDR2.
Click to expand...

Yep.
He probably assumed XDR since AMD just inked a deal with Rambus for a seperate project.
 
NV doesn't want sli on Intel M/B I think its a bad move by Nv as ATI is going to do it and that just gives ATI another source to sell 2 GPU'S.
Greed is going to kill NV
 
975X boards are capable of handling a 1333MHz FSB.Even Intel's one has a setting in the BIOS which allows the FSB to be set in override mode to 1333.
 
savantu said:
975X boards are capable of handling a 1333MHz FSB.Even Intel's one has a setting in the BIOS which allows the FSB to be set in override mode to 1333.
Click to expand...

Curious... where did you get that info? I've worked with pre-production boards and have seen all the "sekret" docs and have seen nothing to suggest that it'll support 1333fsb.
 
$BangforThe$ said:
So your saying if I get the 975X there's a bios setting for 1333FSB
Click to expand...

Don't believe that without some type of confirmation. I've never seen anything like that in Intels design documents. Doesn't mean it isn't there.... just that I haven't heard it yet and since I am constantly seeking internal info on these platforms, I'm a bit skeptical.
 
Poncho said:
Don't believe that without some type of confirmation. I've never seen anything like that in Intels design documents. Doesn't mean it isn't there.... just that I haven't heard it yet and since I am constantly seeking internal info on these platforms, I'm a bit skeptical.
Click to expand...

Better confirmation than this ? BTW , rumors have it that Intel told OEMs Woodcrest will have an 1333MHz FSB...


presler426overclk.jpg


http://theinquirer.net/?article=28412
 
Conroe runs at 1066Mhz and 1333Mhz FSB. I hope Woodcrest will a separate chipset to operate faster than 1333Mhz FSB.
 
savantu said:
Better confirmation than this ? BTW , rumors have it that Intel told OEMs Woodcrest will have an 1333MHz FSB...


presler426overclk.jpg


http://theinquirer.net/?article=28412
Click to expand...

That's an overclocked board. Intels new 975 board will include overclocking abilities, but doesn't support FSB up to that speed officially. Don't mistake that for "drop in" 1333 FSB. Oh... and woodcrest is the newest Xeon, while based on Merom/Conroe, doesn't have jack to do with the 975 chipset. You'll need either Blackford or Greencreek chipsets for that proc.
 
Poncho said:
That's an overclocked board. Intels new 975 board will include overclocking abilities, but doesn't support FSB up to that speed officially. Don't mistake that for "drop in" 1333 FSB. Oh... and woodcrest is the newest Xeon, while based on Merom/Conroe, doesn't have jack to do with the 975 chipset. You'll need either Blackford or Greencreek chipsets for that proc.
Click to expand...


If it doesn't but it has that option , who cares ? ;)
 
savantu said:
If it doesn't but it has that option , who cares ? ;)
Click to expand...

Some people, like me, don't see the point in overclocking and would rather not do it. Overclocking that board to those levels, especially since we don't know how well Intel's boards will overclock, can lead to stability issues. This is all speculation at this point, but I wouldn't suggest that somebody do something based off the thought that it might work. I would have a bit more faith in a good overclocking board (Asus, Abit, etc) reaching those levels, but it's still not guaranteed. We'll know more when people start getting ahold of these boards.
 
I agree I don't like O/C on air cooled machines . But I see no problem with O/C on water fact is I think with water your going to get longer component life. You also get a quiter more peaceful computer room.
 
$BangforThe$ said:
I agree I don't like O/C on air cooled machines . But I see no problem with O/C on water fact is I think with water your going to get longer component life. You also get a quiter more peaceful computer room.
Click to expand...

But what's the point? I get watercooling....quiet PCs are VERY nice, but to overclock to get what.... another 20fps in some benchmark? There is very little real world application for overclocking anymore. That's not to say that I'm not impressed by some of the numbers that are being put up, just to me it's nothing more than a dick measuring contest, which I'm not above don't get me wrong. :D
 
Poncho said:
But what's the point? I get watercooling....quiet PCs are VERY nice, but to overclock to get what.... another 20fps in some benchmark? There is very little real world application for overclocking anymore. That's not to say that I'm not impressed by some of the numbers that are being put up, just to me it's nothing more than a dick measuring contest, which I'm not above don't get me wrong. :D
Click to expand...

Again I agree but it pisses me off when some clown says Ya I had a P4 and its a oven and my AMD is way faster.

So I through water on to put out the fire . O/C to = out the speed and their You have it.

By the way my wifes machine with a 3.2c single core now runs nick and nick with a FX57 in games that have been patched for multi cores . Now thats Bang for the Bucks
 
$BangforThe$ said:
Again I agree but it pisses me off when some clown says Ya I had a P4 and its a oven and my AMD is way faster.

So I through water on to put out the fire . O/C to = out the speed and their You have it.

By the way my wifes machine with a 3.2c single core now runs nick and nick with a FX57 in games that have been patched for multi cores . Now thats Bang for the Bucks
Click to expand...

Watch, the large AMD Follower croud will jump you. My Bud's 2.6C all of sudden loves Call Of Duty 2 and Battlefield 2. That's compared to my 3500+ with a much better X800XL video card. He has an 800 Pro. My old 2.6C only has a 9700 Pro that's a laugh.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=197&type=expert&pid=10

Games benchmarked were Far Cry, FEAR and Call of Duty 2. I ran them at the same resolutions that we run them in during our GPU tests, as no doubt anyone buying a $1000 CPU is going to have a very nice GPU as well. I did leave AA and AF disabled, however.

I also decided to use NVIDIA's 82.12 Beta drivers that enabled dual-core processor support as well as using the SMP patch from Call of Duty 2 available at http://www.callofduty.com/patch_cod2/ .
Click to expand...

Donnie27
 
Poncho said:
Some people, like me, don't see the point in overclocking and would rather not do it. Overclocking that board to those levels, especially since we don't know how well Intel's boards will overclock, can lead to stability issues. This is all speculation at this point, but I wouldn't suggest that somebody do something based off the thought that it might work. I would have a bit more faith in a good overclocking board (Asus, Abit, etc) reaching those levels, but it's still not guaranteed. We'll know more when people start getting ahold of these boards.
Click to expand...
If the chip is based on 1333bus, then it's not an overclock.

-bZj
 
Down8 said:
If the chip is based on 1333bus, then it's not an overclock.

-bZj
Click to expand...

If the Chipset / motherboard is not made for a 1333 bus, then even if the CPU is, the board is overclocked.

EG: put a 800mhz FSB P4 on a chipset that only supports a 533 FSB offically (Intel E7205), and run it at 800mhz, and you are overclocking the motherboard and chipset, even though you are not overclocking the CPU. (I know someone doing this with a Gigabyte motherboard based on that chipset)

==>Lazn
 
Lazn_Work said:
If the Chipset / motherboard is not made for a 1333 bus, then even if the CPU is, the board is overclocked.

EG: put a 800mhz FSB P4 on a chipset that only supports a 533 FSB offically (Intel E7205), and run it at 800mhz, and you are overclocking the motherboard and chipset, even though you are not overclocking the CPU. (I know someone doing this with a Gigabyte motherboard based on that chipset)

==>Lazn
Click to expand...

Not at all. The override setting is NO different than anyother default setting=P *IF this setting puts every Clock Generator and etc.., at normal clock, like 100, 33 and etc.. then it is NOT overclocking anything. You would then have to go past 1333MHz to start overclocking. That's the difference between i925 and i925XE with 1066 for example. XE is not an overclocked version of 925. It simply has the Timers or Clock Gens rated for that speed by default or OVERRIDE. The Chipset is either made to run at a certain speed with headroom or have default settings and or lock everything down timer wise to keep everything in-sync.

The example you gave is off because that Gigabyte motherboard doesn't have an 800MHz FSB override that puts all of the other settings in sync. Important difference. Just think motherboard Ratios? These are for default settings for compatibility, NOT overclocking. If you have a 533MHz FSB Processor but would still like to run you RAM at 3200, you'd used a 4:5 and nothing is overclocked. If you have an 800MHz FSB Proc but only PC-2700 RAM? 5:4 and you're set, that's a stock setting, NOT underclocking the chipset. Same can be done with i9xx chipset and DDR2 when 800MHz FSB Processors are used with DDR2 667 RAM. With improved DME, DMA and etc.., that extra bandwidth isn't wasted using a 4:5 Ratio. Or is that 4:6?

Donnie27
 
Maybe overclocking was a bad choice of words. What you are doing is running the Chipset out of spec and while that may have no side affects, it is possible that you will run into some unforseen issues. The 975 Chipset DOES NOT officially support 1333fsb so running it at such is putting that chipset out of spec.
 
Donnie27 said:
Not at all. The override setting is NO different than anyother default setting=P *IF this setting puts every Clock Generator and etc.., at normal clock, like 100, 33 and etc.. then it is NOT overclocking anything. You would then have to go past 1333MHz to start overclocking. That's the difference between i925 and i925XE with 1066 for example. XE is not an overclocked version of 925. It simply has the Timers or Clock Gens rated for that speed by default or OVERRIDE. The Chipset is either made to run at a certain speed with headroom or have default settings and or lock everything down timer wise to keep everything in-sync.

The example you gave is off because that Gigabyte motherboard doesn't have an 800MHz FSB override that puts all of the other settings in sync. Important difference. Just think motherboard Ratios? These are for default settings for compatibility, NOT overclocking. If you have a 533MHz FSB Processor but would still like to run you RAM at 3200, you'd used a 4:5 and nothing is overclocked. If you have an 800MHz FSB Proc but only PC-2700 RAM? 5:4 and you're set, that's a stock setting, NOT underclocking the chipset. Same can be done with i9xx chipset and DDR2 when 800MHz FSB Processors are used with DDR2 667 RAM. With improved DME, DMA and etc.., that extra bandwidth isn't wasted using a 4:5 Ratio. Or is that 4:6?

Donnie27
Click to expand...

Even if you put every other device in a locked correct spec (and yes that Gigabyte MB does that) the FSB is running out of spec at 800mhz for the Chipset, the Intel 7205 chipset is only designed to run at 533mhz FSB max. The fact that it will still run at 800mhz is rather amazing really.

==>Lazn
 
Poncho said:
Maybe overclocking was a bad choice of words. What you are doing is running the Chipset out of spec and while that may have no side affects, it is possible that you will run into some unforseen issues. The 975 Chipset DOES NOT officially support 1333fsb so running it at such is putting that chipset out of spec.
Click to expand...

QFT! That's why I siad "*IF". I don't work for Intel and have NO idea what the MAX operating speed of i975 is. Since this setting keeps ALL of the others settings at their default speeds, it hardly **seems out of spec. If the Clock Gens don't support or can't match these timings then they are out of spec, if they can however, they're NOT!

Example. My old Asus P4T-E had jumppers for "Future 533 MHz FSB support". This was bogus because Asus used the older TI Clock Gens that wouldn't support 533. The next revisions had these and the rest is history. Asus

Donnie27
 
Lazn_Work said:
Even if you put every other device in a locked correct spec (and yes that Gigabyte MB does that) the FSB is running out of spec at 800mhz for the Chipset, the Intel 7205 chipset is only designed to run at 533mhz FSB max. The fact that it will still run at 800mhz is rather amazing really.

==>Lazn
Click to expand...

It doesn't have an override setting for 800MHz so you're not talking about the same thing here. There is NO fact in that case when compared to something has a 1333MHz override setting though. Look at the picture of that BIOS? You don't have to put anything at any setting. All of the values are DEFAULT. That's why many Skipped Granet Bay and waited for Canterwood. i875 can easily do 1066. If it had an override setting for 1066 and IT, not you, locked all of the settings to the correct speeds, that's Spec/Support and etc....

Honestly? We should be bitching why Intel isn't shipping official 1600MHz FSB LOL! There's NO WAY in hell I believe 1333MHz is hard for even i925 or 915 let alone the newer chips. i965 is an improvement because of its Mem-Controller and ICH8, NOT its BUS as one Intel Rep told me. Intel should swallow some of it phuggin' pride and use the newest Co Hypertransport.

Donnie27
 
Donnie27 said:
It doesn't have an override setting for 800MHz so you're not talking about the same thing here. There is NO fact in that case when compared to something has a 1333MHz override setting though. Look at the picture of that BIOS? You don't have to put anything at any setting. All of the values are DEFAULT. That's why many Skipped Granet Bay and waited for Canterwood. i875 can easily do 1066. If it had an override setting for 1066 and IT, not you, locked all of the settings to the correct speeds, that's Spec/Support and etc....

Honestly? We should be bitching why Intel isn't shipping official 1600MHz FSB LOL! There's NO WAY in hell I believe 1333MHz is hard for even i925 or 915 let alone the newer chips. i965 is an improvement because of its Mem-Controller and ICH8, NOT its BUS as one Intel Rep told me. Intel should swallow some of it phuggin' pride and use the newest Co Hypertransport.

Donnie27
Click to expand...

The thing is, that it is Intel, not you, or the motherboard mfg, or even the BIOS mfg (Phoenix, AMI, Award) that determines what is spec for a device that they make.

And from here: http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/975x/index.htm you can see that the 975 chipset supports 800mhz or 1066mhz. This means that 1333mhz is overclocking, by definintion.

Overclocking is running an electronic device faster than it is spec'd to by the MFG.

==>Lazn
 
Lazn_Work said:
The thing is, that it is Intel, not you, or the motherboard mfg, or even the BIOS mfg (Phoenix, AMI, Award) that determines what is spec for a device that they make.

And from here: http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/975x/index.htm you can see that the 975 chipset supports 800mhz or 1066mhz. This means that 1333mhz is overclocking, by definintion.

Overclocking is running an electronic device faster than it is spec'd to by the MFG.

==>Lazn
Click to expand...

The thing is, you should look at where I said "*IF* LOL! It is NOT overclocking IF Asus, Abit or the others BUILDs the MOTHERBOARD with support for 1333MHz FSB. Now post an Intel Link saying that Manufactures CAN'T use 1333MHz? Come on, please? Intel's 440 BX didn't officially support 133MHz. Ever hear of the Asus P3B-F? So let's see, the stock settings on this board is overclocking, right?

Donnie27
 
Donnie27 said:
The thing is, you should look at where I said "*IF* LOL! It is NOT overclocking IF Asus, Abit or the others BUILDs the MOTHERBOARD with support for 1333MHz FSB. Now post an Intel Link saying that Manufactures CAN'T use 1333MHz? Come on, please? Intel's 440 BX didn't officially support 133MHz. Ever hear of the Asus P3B-F? So let's see, the stock settings on this board is overclocking, right?

Donnie27
Click to expand...

I doesn't matter if Asus put a setting in there for a 9ghz FSB, the chipset would be overclocked if you set it to a non Intel spec.

Yes running a 440BX chipset at 133MHZ FSB is overclocking the chipset.

I had a Abit BX133 motherboard.. a BX chipset motherboard made by Abit to run 133MHZ fsb cpu's. And running it as designed was overclocking the CHIPSET. If the chipset had blown up, Abit would have replaced the board, but they could NOT have gotten any support from Intel for the problem because they were selling the board out of spec, eg: overclocked.

==>Lazn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top