Memory

Recommendation: 2 X 256MB Mushkin PC3500 Level One Dual Pack (CAS2)
Price: $145 shipped



For whatever reason, memory prices have skyrocketed recently. Everything from PC3200 or PC3500 to 1GB, memory modules have gone up significantly in price. By the time you read this, prices may have shifted significantly, so be wary.

While companies like Corsair, OCZ and now Kingston are heavy favorites among high-end memory consumers, Mushkin is also starting to gain favor rapidly. In the last few months, we've been using OCZ's Platinum modules as the standard for a majority of AnandTech's testbeds, but we have also been using Mushkin Level One memory (mostly Level II actually). Unfortunately, it is getting harder and harder to find dual packs nowadays, but Mushkin Level One Dual Packs are available at large vendors, like Axion and Newegg, so they're still out there. We've been able to do lots of testing with these specific PC3500 modules and they indeed run stabily at PC3500 (433MHz DDR) on many currently available motherboards. There are many PC3500 modules that aren't capable of reliable DDR433 speeds on popular motherboards, so be wary. But motherboards such as the ABIT NF7-S Rev. 2 and ASUS P4C800-E will run these modules very well, so we suggest that you take a look at them when purchasing your motherboard. However, don't get confused; PC3500 is not an officially sanctioned JEDEC spec, and therefore there are no motherboards on the market which can claim that they officially support PC3500 speeds. PC3500 is quite easily attainable with modern-day motherboards, but just be aware that PC3200, not PC3500, is the highest speed that your motherboard manufacturer will officially support under warranty.

Alternative: 2 X 512MB OCZ PC3700 GOLD Revision 2 (CAS2.5)
Price: $269 shipped



After developing a reputation based on shoddy business practices, not to mention shoddy memory, OCZ has come roaring back and has gained wide acceptance among enthusiasts and average users alike after many months of wary purchasing and close inspection by hardware web sites like AnandTech. We've raved about OCZ modules in many reviews over the last few months (this one most recently), and have been extremely pleased with the results that we've been getting. OCZ modules have gone from disappointing and unreliable to impressive and dependable in what seems like an overnight transformation. OCZ still has a ways to go to gain acceptance among doubters who have never tried their memory or continue to hold onto conspiracy theories about their link to the OCZ of old, but we aren't placing OCZ's GOLD Rev. 2 PC3700 modules as runner-up based on whim, so take that to heart. The GOLD series is capable of a "low" latency of CAS2.5 at DDR466 speeds (PC3700) and has a huge ceiling for overclockers. If you're not an overclocker, then obviously the GOLD series will not be of much value to you. If you are overclocking, just remember that you take a risk by overclocking your memory, both in terms of voiding warranties and damaging hardware. Beginners need not apply here for overclocking.

Notice that these OCZ modules are 512MB modules and not 256MB modules like the Mushkin ones that we had recommended. If you want cheaper 512MB modules, we suggest that you take a look at Crucial and Kingston brands. Just be aware that, generally, the cheapest 512MB modules are usually the modules that don't overclock that well.

Video

Recommendation: 128MB Gigabyte Radeon 9600 Pro, DVI and TV-out
Price: $135 shipped



Gigabyte makes several excellent ATI Radeon cards nowadays. Their stock coolers are bigger and better than most you'll find, at least compared to PowerColor and Sapphire.

Gigabyte sent us their Radeon 9600 Pro quite some time ago and today, we are finally able to do a little testing on it. Performance is on par with other 9600 Pro video cards that we've tested. In fact, it was one of the fastest of the bunch. Overclocking performance with Gigabyte's 9600 Pro is stellar; we were able to achieve 475MHz core clock and 700MHz memory clock speeds using the stock Gigabyte cooler. These speeds were Prime 95 and SPECviewperf 7.1.1 stable, but as we've said before, that only gives you a narrow idea of how stable your system will be over a period of several months. Still, we didn't experience a single issue during our stability testing at 475MHz/700MHz. Remember, the stock speeds for the 9600 Pro are 400MHz/600MHz, so we're talking about quite a large difference in performance when overclocked to 475MHz/700MHz.

In case you're curious, we set VAGP in the BIOS to 1.6V. This is a perfectly safe voltage, even though 1.5V is the default VAGP for modern day motherboards. Nothing higher than 1.6V is necessary though, as it'll yield diminishing returns to the point where it's basically pointless to overvolt any higher. The 475MHz/700MHz overclock was achieved on both the 2500+ ABIT NF7-S Rev.2 system and the 2.8C ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe system, running at 2.52GHz (1.80V) and 3.59GHz (1.65V) respectively.

Alternative: Sapphire Radeon 9800 Pro with DVI and TV-out
Price: $209



Sapphire also makes one of the better 9800 Pro video cards out there. Speed and features for the price are excellent ($209), and overclocking performance with the stock cooling is impressive. The best combination of core and memory clock speed that we were able to reach was 415MHz core clock and 780MHz memory clock speeds with just the stock cooling. For the few hours that we tested the 9800 Pro with Prime 95 and SPECviewperf 7.1.1, we were unable to see any IQ issues and didn't discover any instability. Overall, a fantastic performer for the money.

If you feel the need to squeeze out more performance from your video card, we suggest that you replace your stock cooling solution (whether it's the 9600 Pro or 9800 Pro) with an Artic Cooling VGA Silencer. They can be had for $26 shipped online.

Listed below is part of our RealTime pricing engine, which lists the lowest prices available on ATI video cards 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.

CPU and Motherboard Alternatives Monitor, Computer Case, and Power Supply
Comments Locked

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

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now