Weekly Buyer's Guide: Overclocking System - April 2004
by Evan Lieb on April 8, 2004 10:47 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
CPU and Motherboard Alternatives
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 2.8C 800MHz FSB Northwood (512K L2 cache)Motherboard: ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe (875P chipset)
Price: CPU - $184 shipped (OEM). Motherboard - $179 shipped
Like the AMD overclocking scene, the Intel overclocking scene was at a standstill for several months after the 2.4C was released. Just as it was last month, most enthusiasts today still consider the 2.8C to be the Intel overclocker's CPU of choice. The 2.8C, like the 2.4C, runs at 800MHz FSB, but the primary difference is the 2.8C's multiplier - 14X instead of 12X with the 2.4C. Unlike a lot of AMD processors, all Intel processors come factory locked. It's an unfortunate, but true, reality for overclockers. Nonetheless, Intel overclocking is most definitely a viable solution for overclockers these days, especially due to the superb additional performance you get versus an overclocked Athlon XP system.
As usual, we have some testing to share as well. First off, we decided to try out our luck with the 2.8C's default Vcore of 1.525V. At this voltage, we were able to achieve a stable overclock of 3.39GHz. Clearly though, more than 1.525V was needed, so we cranked up the voltage to what is probably the highest Vcore with which you want to experiment using a Pentium 4 processor: 1.65V (1.70V might be OK). At 1.65V, our 2.8C reached 3.59GHz, or an additional 200MHz bump in clock speed as a result of raising Vcore 0.125V from its stock 1.525V setting. At nearly 3.6GHz, we were able to sustain stable operation for 8 hours using Prime95 and SPECviewperf 7.1.1 programs. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to replicate exactly how stable your system is going to be over months of usage when we were only able to verify stability at 3.59GHz for a few hours. But what our results do tell you is that a stable 3.3GHz to 3.4GHz is definitely easily possible under 1.65V. Of course, we're assuming you get a chip at least as good as ours, and there's no guarantee of that. We bought our 2.8C, just like we did our 2500+, from a local vendor, so our processors were not handpicked from Intel or AMD themselves. Therefore, our results are representative of a CPU that is widely available to the public through online venders. As we've reiterated countless times, overclocking is never guaranteed, so don't be disappointed if you can only get, for example, 3.0GHz from your 2.8C. Also remember that Intel and AMD processors do not have the same scalability limit, as each processor is binned differently according to the demand of that particular grade of processor.
When all is said and done, the P4C800-E Deluxe has proven itself to be the premier Pentium 4 motherboard for overclockers. We have been routinely able to reach into the 270MHz-280MHz FSB range on good, old retail Intel cooling with a good 2.4C processor. However, with a 2.8C processor, the FSB that you're able to reach isn't really too important, while the core clock speed is. However, if you're using a 2.4C processor, the P4C800-E's ability to sustain a 1:1 FSB:memory ratio is significant. Running your memory and FSB in sync at that high a speed will yield tremendous performance. But in the end, the performance hit you take by using high speed memory to match your high speed (overclocked) FSB may not be worth the extra money due to inflated memory timings (read: latencies).
However you cut it, though, the ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe offers everything an overclocker could want: plenty of room for FSB overclocking, 2.85V max VDIMM, 1.95V max Vcore, and features like CSA Gigabit LAN, SATA and IDE RAID, IEEE 1394 FireWire, etc. This motherboard is absolutely packed with just about every feature that a high end user and overclocker could need. The P4C800-E Deluxe is also capable of handling 2.8E processors, based on the 0.09-micron Prescott core. However, as we've mentioned in previous Buyer's Guides, we highly advise against purchasing any "E" revision Pentium 4 processors for now, even though they are 100% compatible with the ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe. The slightly higher prices on some "E" Pentium 4 processors, the slightly slower performance, and their high power consumption are all drawbacks of using a Prescott processor for overclocking.
Listed below is part of our RealTime pricing engine, which lists the lowest prices available on the Intel CPUs and motherboards from many different reputable vendors:
If you cannot find the lowest prices on the products that we've recommended on this page, it's because we don't list some of them in our RealTime pricing engine. Until we do, we suggest that you do an independent search online at the various vendors' web sites. Just pick and choose where you want to buy your products by looking for a vendor located under the "Vendor" heading.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
30 Comments
View All Comments
Evan Lieb - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
Doormat,3.0C is more of a crapshoot, not to mention more money than a 2.8C. The overclocking difference between the two is no where near 400MHz, either. Look at our 2.8C overclock as just one example.
Jeff7181,
Spending well over $100 more for less storage and only occasionally noticeable access time increases just isn't reasonable. At least, IMO. :)
PrinceGaz,
I disagree. We're not claiming this overclocking system will meet everyone's needs. However, we make an attempt to fit as many needs as possible. It's impossible to please every buyer's (or in this case, overclocker's) needs. Some people will find this system perfect, while others won't. Not a whole lot we can do about it.
Muzzy,
Newegg listed the incorrect speed. It's 1.87GHz.
Muzzy - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
Hum, I went to newegg. I found that the mobile 2500+ is clocked at 1.83, not 1.87 as suggested by the article. Am I missing something here?Doormat - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
The 3.0C isnt that big of a price increase from the 2.8C, $30 according to the chart at the bottom of that page. Especially since the guys at the overclockers.com forum have bought several and shown that average overclocks are 3.7G. One guy bought 4, one ran at 3.65, two ran at 3.75, one ran at 3.9+ (P95 stable, all on air). Those are pretty favorable numbers when you look at it. If a 2.8Cs averages at 3.35, and the new 30 cap 3.0Cs average 3.7, the $30 is worth it for the extra 400MHz. At least to me. YMMV.PrinceGaz - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
I spose the XP-M 2500+ is really what this article recommended and everything else was just padding.Unless you're talking high-end overclocking in which case water-cooling is only the beginning and peltiers aren't far behind, then the typical overclocker is looking to save money by getting something that stands a good chance of performing reliably at higher than rated speeds. Thats what the XP-M 2500+ offers as its almost a dead cert to overclock like a trooper when set to normal non-Mobile voltage, and all without needing to worry about extra cooling as you're not really overclocking it (you're just setting it to what is in effect its default voltage on what would otherwise be an underclocked chip). Stick it in your mid-range system of two weeks ago and you've got something a lot closer to what a typical cost-driven overclocker would probably consider and they'd save quite a bit of money too by avoiding certain premium components that give relatively small returns in terms of how high the CPU will go.
The problem is theres all types of overclockers and an article which attempts to target a mixture of them usually ends up missing the mark on most counts.
TheDigitalDiamond - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
*Gasps in horror at the case reccomendation*Anyways... Guys, the majority of overclockers do it to save money when getting higher performance, not to get higher performance at all costs. 3.0GHz P4C's, Raptors, those are all touchy expenditures when you're lookin' to save a couple hundred bucks.
Jeff7181 - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
I still don't agree with the Raptor being the 2nd choice... I still think if you're concerned about speed at all, which overclockers are, you have to get a Raptor. Then you get a larger slower drive for storage.But hey... it's your article and your website =)
solsys - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
If you happen to be an NVIDIA fan, its worth taking a look at the 5900XT. Most of the people I have seen with the card can overclock it to within spitting distance of the highend 5900 or 5950 parts. Kinda nice for a ~$200 card.Scwarzenegger - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
The radeon 9800 se should be mentioned, through drivers it can have all the hardware pipes enabled to perform as fast as (if successful) a 9500 pro (128bit mem) and even a 9800 if it has a 256bit memory bus.If this is incorrect let me know!
Doormat - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link
Oops....Anyways, I'm surprised the 3.0Ghz C chip wasnt recomended for the intel overclocking system. A lot of people have had great results, most get to 3.6, many can get to 3.75 on air, and water and better cooling get to 3.9, 4.0 (though it doesnt seem many get past 4Ghz). The ones that have 30 caps on the bottom, those seem to provide the best OC regardless of scode.
Doormat - Thursday, April 8, 2004 - link