Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well it's not a step forward for gamers!

Only gains you'll get are video encoding or higher/multi load tasks over LG1155.

Im not gonna both with waiting till Ivy. It's still 6 months out yet... From what I've read there appears to be a LG1155 chip coming in Ivy, if this is true then that's sweet.

Although who knows with Intel. The LG1366 was meant to be the flagship for ages and the i7 2600k is on the LG1155 and not LG1366 like i expected (this is going back 3 years or so now), and now SB-E is LG2011

All over the bl00dy shop

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The 2600K is not the flagship though.. i7 990X still is (for some tasks)

Sandy Vadge is for mainstream users who want performance at the right price.

It's just a little funny how well even a supposedly weaker 2500k will take the fight to Intel's $1k+ 6-core monstrosity..

2600k is 1155 socket, not 1366 - that was my point.

It's a i7 label but on a 1155 architecture. There was no indication i7 was going to that socket early on in the days of the i7 920. i3/i5 was meant to live there is what I mean and the i7 to be the enthusiast on 1366.

Im glad i didn't end up going to the 1366 back a while ago, would have been a shot in the foot really as 1366 is effectively dead.

2600k is 1155 socket, not 1366 - that was my point.

It's a i7 label but on a 1155 architecture. There was no indication i7 was going to that socket early on in the days of the i7 920. i3/i5 was meant to live there is what I mean and the i7 to be the enthusiast on 1366.

Im glad i didn't end up going to the 1366 back a while ago, would have been a shot in the foot really as 1366 is effectively dead.

Try buying a 6 core 1155 ;)

LGA2011 will replace 1366 soon anyway.

Not sure if I need 8 cores though...haha, need, sif not get 8 cores.

Edited by DivHunter

Why not be a man and water the cool cpu, can get a good full kit for about $160 to get you started, been running mine water cooling system for about a year know and would never go back to air cooling! There is something about having a radiator in your PC...

+1 On the water cooling, I would get this....

XSPC Rasa 750 RX360 Universal CPU Water Cooling Kit - $199 from PC Case Gear.

I got the XSPC Rasa 750 RX240 kit, the biggest bonus is it drops the temp of the whole case down coz there is no hot air in and around the mother board.

A 2600k will do 4.5ghz on air, more than my E8400 does not on air!

Really cant see a reason to water cool

That is still rather impressive on air, what temp is your motherboard getting to?

Edited by pfcr33

I don't have a 2600k... Yet haha.

It will be hitting 4.5ghz as that seems to be the common result for most chips on the latest stepping. So I realistically cannot see mine being much lower as long as I get all the supporting bits.

My E8400 however sits @ 4.1ghz 24x7, and has since Nov 2008 :)

Was @ 4.3ghz but when the ambient is about 27-28c it gets angry at me. Not sure about mobo temps, either way they aren't high as I've not really changed them. Only alteration is the vcore which is 1.32 @ idle and 1.28 @ load so a bit of droop, but nothing overtly worrying for what was a mid-range board back then.

I don't have a 2600k... Yet haha.

It will be hitting 4.5ghz as that seems to be the common result for most chips on the latest stepping. So I realistically cannot see mine being much lower as long as I get all the supporting bits.

haha dont mind my lake of sleep before makin that rather dumb commet

My E8400 however sits @ 4.1ghz 24x7, and has since Nov 2008 :)

Was @ 4.3ghz but when the ambient is about 27-28c it gets angry at me. Not sure about mobo temps, either way they aren't high as I've not really changed them. Only alteration is the vcore which is 1.32 @ idle and 1.28 @ load so a bit of droop, but nothing overtly worrying for what was a mid-range board back then.

Thast good, everytime I have tried to overclock my i7 950 the thing might run nice for a week or two then is cranky to start so set it back to standard, seams to be to the point now if I change anything it just wont start

haha dont mind my lake of sleep before makin that rather dumb commet

Thast good, everytime I have tried to overclock my i7 950 the thing might run nice for a week or two then is cranky to start so set it back to standard, seams to be to the point now if I change anything it just wont start

What voltage did you use?

im guessing too much lol

I will have to see if I can find the spead sheet I was using other wise I would have no idea, One of the things I read somewere was to increase certain settings by 10% then 15%, I think it was around the 20% mark I had problems, as I realy had no idea wtf I was doing, I figured it was time to give up while it still ran lol

any need for the 6970? there is heaps of articles now about the 6950 just needing a flashing of its bios to be the same as a 6970.

any particular reason other than OCing as why you have gone the i7 over the i5 2600k, i am looking at the i5 thats all....

i7 has 2 threads per core, plus 2mb more cache. Means virtually nothing for gaming, but some programs that use hyper-threading are much faster.

Also only some 6950's can be flashed these days, most now have the shaders lasered off. I was one of the lucky ones, but these days it's a bit of hit-and-miss.

The 2600k is i7 branding also not just i5.

http://ark.intel.com/products/52214/Intel-Core-i7-2600K-Processor-(8M-Cache-3_40-GHz)

Same price too, why not i say!

RE: 6950 - ye been reading up on that recently.

I might hold off till more is known about the 7XXX series, some rumours starting to leak now so hopefully more solid info in coming weeks (month).

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...