• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Just changed my D805 to a D940...

Tooks

Tooks

Tooks

Associate
Joined
24 Oct 2005
Posts
2,047
Location
Lincolnshire
As above really, with the prices of the Intel Dual Core Pentiums on the fall, I got myself a D940 a couple of days ago, and thought I'd share a couple of points.

At stock, the 940 did 1M super PI only about 10 secs quicker than my 805 at 3.1Ghz (the fastest I could get it to run on my mobo stable).

I've only done some basic overclocking at the moment, but the 940 is running fine at 3.7ghz already.

The most noticeable thing though, is how much cooler the 940 runs compared to the 805. My 805 used to get to about 55C under load, but the 940 has peaked at 35C. I know it should be cooler as it uses the 65nm process, but I was surprised by how much!

My 805 is going into a Linux machine I'm building now, and it's still a great little chip, but for the last of the netburst chips, the 9 series aren't bad really.
 
im sure if intel did the same thing to netbust what they are planning to do to conroe in the future then the netburst cpus would have been the fastest around.

intel planning to get over 12mb cache onto the conroe die at some point. if they managed that with netburst then the difference would have been huge. its been shown in benchmarks that netburst has a MASSIVE speed increase went p4 cpus with 1mb cache shifted to 2mb cache.
 
its not bad, mine doesn't run "that" cool, but a very hot room probably isnt' helping, i've bumped the voltage up a little, only really 1.33v or so and it seems 95% stable at 4.5Ghz, 4.3Ghz is rock solid, played cs:s, bunch of benchies and some other games with no issue for hours and hours. its actually not at all bad, faster than i thought it would feel(in benchies) gaming is fairly similar to my x2 4400+ overclocked mainly as its gpu limited. its a 930 i have though and i'm pushing 310Mhz fsb which has proved to be maybe a bit much for somethign in system, i think its just the cpu overclock limit without lower temps or more juice.

its only a stop gap cpu till my conroe arrives, but i've been more than impressed by a chip i thought was well past it. at stock it does feel a little slow, benchmark wise 2k5 i think with a x1900xt was only 8.5k or so stock cpu, which is low compared to my ath 64 setup, but overclocked to 4.5Ghz i was at 11k ish without much change in gpu. cheap and fast i would say, £125 for 2x4.3Ghz isn't half bad.

as for the cache, its a per core thing, the quad core conroe(kentsfield) has 8mb cache, still 2mb per core essentially, think its two shared 4mb cache's but i'm not too sure. i would assume the native quad core part(kentsfield is two conroes slapped together) would have a 8mb shared together cache, maybe. its not like they'll do a 2 core conroe with 6mb cache each.
 
Last edited:
the 975x asus board, i bought the board mem and then the cpu to get it running till conroe arrives as i needed to sell old computer and take new one to uni(tonight) i didn't want to wait another week and then build it at uni(tiny room, ,effort ++ ). the g-skill £170 2gb pack is easily matching the £350 ddr1000 pack, so far i've hit around ddr1060 with 2.3v with 4,4,4,15 timings, not really had a chance to try higher on 5,5,5,15 as i've only messed around for a few hours testing diff ratios, overclocks and stuff. really this mem apparently keeps scaling higher with same timings as long as you up voltage but the board max is 2.3v, seen people with same timings but pushing ddr1200 but with like 2.7/2.8v.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom