BFG 680i board E5200 CPU support ?

Vogon

Vogon

Vogon

Soldato
Joined
14 Nov 2002
Posts
4,456
Hi guys, been out of the loop for a bit.
I was just wondering if my ageing BFG 680i board would support the E5200 cpu ?
I see the last BIOS for the board was P33 and released 1/10/2008 it states added support for Penryn dual core cpu's but not much else ...
 
The BFG website seems to suggest that the only processors the board doesn't support is 45nm quads. Would you really want to swap your current processor for an E5200 though? Sure it'd use less juice and run a bit cooler but you'd lose 2MB of cache for a start and I doubt you'd be able to hit much higher than 3.8GHz.
 
The 680i chipset does support 45nm dual cores but not 45nm quads so there may be a bios update for your board. Im running an E5300 on my board just fine.

But as the chap above said id keep the CPU in your sig ;)
 
Hmm ... well kinda hoping the E5200 would hit 4ghz, and I thought that the newer 45nm were faster clock for clock, or am I confusing it with something else ?

TBH I was just pricing a system up for a family member, and was going to look at the X2 7850 black, but it looks like the E5200 might give a bit more bang for the buck on a budget build, but then thought about getting one myself too, aim for the 4 ghz target ;)
 
Have a read of my thread here. Amongst others, a E6600 and E5200 are tested at various clockspeeds. I certainly would'nt go from a E6600 down to a E5200. In programs that make the most of the cache the E6600 will always be better. 4Ghz is not a certainty from a E5200 either. They are very hit and miss when it comes to overclocking. Some even struggle to get past 3.2Ghz.
 
Thanks Pastymuncher, nice test :)
So it seems my "old" E6600 still holds as a good cpu ... I knew the clockspeed would hold it in good stead, but didn't realise the extra cache would make as much difference.
I guess an E5200 would be more of a sideways step, a tad slower at the same speed but generating less heat.
Unless it hits 4ghz which would make it faster all round, but thats less common than I thought for those cpus ... not worth the expenditure on the off chance it seems.

So, for the family members bugdet build, the E5200 would be the better route than the X2 7850 Black do you think ?
 
Last edited:
Ive heard each meg of cache is equal to about 200mhz of clock speed in terms of performance.

Dunno if its true or not though...

Would definitely keep that E6600, and if you have it at 3.6ghz then your FSB is going to be much higher now than it will be with the E5200.
 
Vogon said:
Thanks Pastymuncher, nice test :)
So it seems my "old" E6600 still holds as a good cpu ... I knew the clockspeed would hold it in good stead, but didn't realise the extra cache would make as much difference.
I guess an E5200 would be more of a sideways step, a tad slower at the same speed but generating less heat.
Unless it hits 4ghz which would make it faster all round, but thats less common than I thought for those cpus ... not worth the expenditure on the off chance it seems.

So, for the family members bugdet build, the E5200 would be the better route than the X2 7850 Black do you think ?
Click to expand...

The AMD route would have an upgrade path. 775 will soon be killed off, 2010 i think.
 
Hi.
Upgrade path isn't an issue TBH these people keep PC for 6 years + and renew after then.

I went for the E5200 build, I may have a decent chip ... Will boot @ 4 ghz with 3.250v, but thats it ... thats in a Gigabyte G31M Budget MATX mobo with stock cooler, and a budget 400w PSU !

I know its not stable as it just reset lol, but With some water and on my 680i board maybe it would hold 4 ??

It will push up to 3.7 on stock voltage too.

Whats max safe voltage for that cpu ?

And would 4ghz make up for the cache over 3.6 ?
 
Last edited:
3.250v . :eek: I presume you mean 1.3250v. :D

No more than 1.45v for a 45nm cpu but 1.4v would be even better.

If you check my review and take the figures from the E6600 clocked at 3Ghz and the E5200 clocked at 3.6Ghz the E6600 still beats it in some test's and that's a 600 mhz difference. It will depend on the programs and if they make use of the cache. Personally it's not a change i would do. I would take the E6600 any day and once past 3.6Ghz the gains from clocking get smaller and smaller. I found that out with my E8500.
 
LoL yep .. 1.3250 :)
I have to admit, I have gotten a bit fixated with the 4ghz figure ;)
I am gonna drop it into my system just to see what it can do with decent power, mobo and cooling.
Then decide if I should put it back in their pc with a mild clock, or keep it and get them another :)
Thanks for the info, much appreciated :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom