Is the X6800 worth the price??

[easyrider]

My point exactly, but its actually not at all certain that 400FSB is 100% stable atm

I'm at 9x 400 3.6ghz prime stable with no issues,

 

[clone]

X6800 £782.55

 

[Participant]

no there is not, only the E6800 is, hence the £700+ price tag.

it depends on what you want, if you want to overclock like mad ie cascade, or other extreme cooling methods, then the unlocked multi provide you with a degree of flexibility.

now if you are on air, then since the conroes max out @ 4000mhz(lucky if you get this on air) you are left between the e6600(9x multi) or e6700(10x multi). so to get 4000mhz you would need 450x9 or 450x10 for the respective cpu. Therefor it all boils down to a motherboard that can do either 450fsb easily everyday with no stability problems.

so its really a motherboard choice rather than a cpu, i am personally after a e6700, am really after stability more than mad mhz, 400x10 is good for me on this generation of mobo, six months down the link i am sure we will see motherboards that will do 450mhz with everyday use no problem, just right now i don't see it.

Thanks for that, explained things nicely

 

[Corasik]

I think a [email protected] on a 400FSB is a more realistic expectation on air than a E6700 hitting 4Ghz, and higher FSB improves the memory latencies, and has better memory bandwidth, than an E6700 that capped out at 3.6 while the motherboard was only at 360FSB.

There's no guarantee that the retail stepping B2 will be stable above 3.6Ghz. Seems they are still hitting 3.4+, but its a mass produced stepping, so they will probably be a lot more variation than the engineering samples.

Still, considering a 1.93Ghz Core2 appears to be almost as fast as a 3.73Ghz P4D (965 EE) then I think even at stock a E6600 will blow away my Northwood [email protected], and if I can clock it to 3.4Ghz or faster on air, at stock voltages all the better

 

[fenderbass86]

@ Tigjaw

Have you got all the stuff in your sig? Or is it all on pre-order?

I want to know how good that Intel 965 motherboard is.

 

[Vertigo]

Not a chance in hell.

The X6800, like all top-of-the-range processors a la AMD FX & P4 EE are reserved for those who just have to have the absolute best available, regardless of price.

Don't get me wrong, I've no doubt it's a stonking processor but no one can reasonably argue that's in any shape or form "value for money" compared to the lesser processors.

A very few buyers of the X6800 will have a genuine reason for needing the processor, for very computationally intensive tasks. The rest just want it for whatever reason, either bragging rights or just because they have money to burn

 

[AMDPower]

Thanks for that, explained things nicely

your welcome

think a [email protected] on a 400FSB is a more realistic expectation on air than a E6700 hitting 4Ghz, and higher FSB improves the memory latencies, and has better memory bandwidth, than an E6700 that capped out at 3.6 while the motherboard was only at 360FSB.

not sure if this is addressed to me, but i did mention in my post that 4000mhz (lucky if you get this on air).

 

[UKTopGun]

X6800 isnt worth it.

Hell, my processor with my graphics card still plays Oblivion pretty sweet imo. And to think I'm playing the same game, still being able to see everything, for much less than the people spending crazy prices just to select tick a box on a game to make it look better .

I love games and all, I play them way too much in fact (I'm ashamed of how many hours I have) - I just can't justify people spending loads of £££ on them.

 

[drunkenmaster]

I think a [email protected] on a 400FSB is a more realistic expectation on air than a E6700 hitting 4Ghz, and higher FSB improves the memory latencies, and has better memory bandwidth, than an E6700 that capped out at 3.6 while the motherboard was only at 360FSB.

There's no guarantee that the retail stepping B2 will be stable above 3.6Ghz. Seems they are still hitting 3.4+, but its a mass produced stepping, so they will probably be a lot more variation than the engineering samples.

Still, considering a 1.93Ghz Core2 appears to be almost as fast as a 3.73Ghz P4D (965 EE) then I think even at stock a E6600 will blow away my Northwood [email protected], and if I can clock it to 3.4Ghz or faster on air, at stock voltages all the better

not strictly true, on a bunch of motherboards you will need to set the 1333fsb strap to get beyond i think around 370fsb at the moment, this drops the base speed the northbridge works out and also increases the timings which is what is letting motherboards get a lot higher fsb's. but a e6700 if you can keep the 1066fsb strap just at 3.6GHz and the e6600 will have a higher fsb, but not hugely, it will have a slower northbridge and higher latencys. however, its down to if we (and by we i mean not at all me ) make a new northbridge tweaker like there was for the 865/875 series boards. hopefully they can be found, the right registers and settings to give the same latencys for the 1333 strap. if they can be found and set it would be the equivilent (to a point) of htt on an amd board. at some point you hit the HTT limit and drop the multiplier, on an amd board thats all it does drop the multi, but the strap causes the northbridge to drop the speed and increase timings.

theres obviously a point where even with higher latencys better fsb and more cpu clock speed are better.

more overclocking help, i still say get the E6600 just saying there can be sweet spots, ranges of fsb where you're better off