Tom’s Hardware built an Intel machine with an MSI Intel P45 motherboard and Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 processor, and then overclocked it up to 4.2 GHz. System Setup: 3.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 processor MSI P45D3 Neo-F motherboard 2 x 2GB DDR3-1600 Corsair TR3X6G1600C8D memory 300 GB Western Digital VelociRaptor SATA/300 16 MB Cache HDD Fortron Everest 1010, 1010 W power supply unit “Although the 4.26 GHz setting provided the most performance, the 3.9 GHz overclock turns out to be the winner of this efficiency analysis. The clock speed increase provides a nice speed bump when compared to the 3.33 GHz stock speed without bumping power consumption up to excessive levels. If you are looking to get the best performance paired with the lowest effective power consumption, the fastest possible speed without a voltage increase should be your goal.” [Tom’s Hardware | Overclocking Core 2 Duo: Power Versus Performance] Although an Intel Core i7 and/or AMD Phenom II based system would be the ideal setup for future-proofing your build, the Intel P45 and Core 2 Duo E8600 combo is still a great one to have, especially if you are into overclocking. Technorati Tags: intel, core 2 duo, e8600, p45, overclock

ExtremeTech rounded up four motherboards based on the Intel X58/ICH10R chipset. The mainboards tested were the Asus P6T (US$260), ECS X58B-A ($250), EVGA X58 3X SLI ($300), and Gigabyte EX58-UD4P ($270).

        The test setup configuration was the following:





          Intel Core i7 920 processor





            6GB (3x2GB) OCZ PC3-10666 DDR3 memory







              Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 750GB SATA 3Gbps HDD









                AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 graphics











                  Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit SP1 operating system









        "Take that ASUS P6T and build your Core i7 around it. Then overclock the bejeeszus out of it. You won't regret it." [ExtremeTech | X58 Motherboard Roundup]








                While the ASUS P6T was the top choice, ExtremeTech also liked the Gigabyte EX58-UD4P:









        "The Gigabyte EX58-UD4P, however, is a contender. It might not have overclocked as well as the P6T, but its feature set and its company reputation for support and stability go a long way toward a secondary recommendation." [ExtremeTech]









                  So, if you are planning to build a new system based on the Intel Core i7, and is highly interested in doing some serious overclocking, the Asus P6T motherboard would be on top of your list.

IceRocket : asus p6t, intel core i7, x58 motherboard

AMD Socket AM3 processors are now here. These are Phenom II CPUs that have support for both DDR3 and DDR2 memory.

      Quad-cores:

Phenom II X4 model 810

US$175 2.6GHz 4MB L3 Cache

Phenom II X4 model 805

OEM only 2.5GHz 4MB L3 Cache

      Triple-cores:

Phenom II X3 model 720 Black Edition

$145 2.8GHz 6MB L3 Cache

Phenom II X3 model 710

$125 2.6GHz 6MB L3 Cache

      Common specs:

Socket AM3 (can be used with most AM2+ motherboards) DDR2 or DDR3 2.0GHz memory controller

Guru of 3D put the Phenom II X4 810 and X3 720BE on the test bench:

"... try to mentally place the price and performance of Phenom II X3 and X4 processors in the Core 2 Duo and Quad range. Then it all makes sense. This is where AMD is really competing with Phenom II. And in this product range they certainly are very strong. ... The one processor that for me personally shined was, interestingly enough, the Phenom II X3, the 720 BE processor. I too have that weird stigma about having three cores instead of four, as much as you do. But the results didn't lie ... the X3 720BE is a very competitive Phenom II processor clocked at 2.8 GHz with that luxurious 6MB L3 cache. For roughly 145 USD you can get this BE edition and as such it will allow you to easily overclock it towards 3500-3800 MHz on the most cheap air-cooler one can think of. Again, this particular processor will be placed on the shelves for a only 145 USD and as such this really is an awesome deal." [Guru of 3D | AMD Phenom II X4 810 and X3 720BE review]

AnandTech had a close look at the Phenom II X4 810 and X3 720:

"When AMD launched the Phenom II X4 940 and 920 I called it a True Return to Competition. With the rest of the lineup now more fleshed out, it's truly a return to competition. At every price point that AMD targets, it has produced a CPU competitive to Intel's offerings. ... The performance benefits aren't worth it for Phenom II, so while AM3 sounds cool, it's not necessary today. Thankfully AM3 CPUs will work in AM2+ motherboards, so you aren't forced into a relationship with DDR3 if you're not ready." [AnandTech | The Phenom II X4 810 & X3 720: AMD Gets DDR3 But Doesn't Need It]

PCPerspective reviewed the Phenom II X4 810 and X3 720:

"This AM3 launch will be a disappointment to some, mainly because there is not a high end part that goes with it, nor do we see a massive increase in performance per clock by going to DDR-3 memory. It is still an immature, though stable, platform. Performance will eventually get up there once the motherboard guys figure out the new memory controller and AMD provides potential micro-code updates. ... The X4 810 is a nice part which will make quite a few folks happy. It does not run really hot, it does not pull all that much power, and it certainly performs well considering the price it is at. In most tests, in comparing to previous results from the Phenom 9950, it was about 5% faster overall than its predecessor at that same speed. ... The X3 720 is probably the most interesting part that this release is seeing. The three cores, slightly lower power consumption, better overclocking performance, and the performance of 3 cores for less than the price of a competitive dual core from Intel. Triple cores still have not seen a lot of acceptance from users and OEMs alike, but this particular product might turn a few heads. In most of the single threaded applications, the X3 720 fared about as well as expected against the Core 2 part." [PCPerspective | Phenom II X4 810 and X3 720 Processor Review]

Tom's Hardware tested the Phenom II X4 810 and Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition:

"If you take Socket AM3 out of the picture, the new Phenom IIs mainly serve to fill in and update AMD's processor lineup with its 45 nm technology. Because they drop right into AM2/AM2+ motherboards, you could almost ignore the fact that they sport 938 pins and just be happy AMD is augmenting the mid-range and entry-level nooks in the Phenom family with chips loaded with more cache, higher clocks, and significantly improved scalability. ... What does make sense is the Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition on an existing AM2/AM2+ setup, leveraging cheap DDR2 memory. Gone are the days of Core 2 Duo's dominance over the value-oriented gaming market. Now that AMD has its hat in the ring, there's a lot more to like about the oddness of three cores." [Tom's Hardware | Socket AM3: AMD's Phenom II Gets DDR3]

HardwareZone reviewed the Phenom II X4 810 and X3 720 Black Edition:

"... the Phenom II X4 810 and X3 720 'Black Edition' that we tested did not give us any surprises. Their results were in line with our expectations given what we have seen of the X4 940/920. Moreover, the X3 720 looks to be quite an interesting model, using its extra core to keep up with the Intel dual-cores and at the same time, making use of its higher 2.8GHz clock and larger L3 cache to edge ahead of the X4 810 for those non multi-threaded scenarios. Though we haven't tested its overclocking potential, having one less core usually allows for a better chance of further overclocking this Black Edition X3." [HardwareZone | AMD Does DDR3 - The AM3 Phenom II]

X-bit Labs had a close look at the Phenom II X4 810:

"... the main advantage of Socket AM3 processors is their flexible memory controller that can work with both: DDR3 as well as DDR2 memory. That is why you don't have to use the newly announced mainstream Phenom II processors in Socket AM3 systems. They will work perfectly fine in the existing Socket AM2+ or even Socket AM2 infrastructure. ... As for the AMD Phenom II X4 810 processor we discussed today, it is another incarnation of AMD's strategy to be offering higher performance at a lower cost. Our tests showed that its performance is comparable to that of Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200, while its price is a little lower. As a result, AMD currently has a great alternative to all least expensive quad-core Intel processors starting with the Core 2 Quad Q9400 model. In other words, AMD made a very significant step to offering a competitive lineup of processors that we have every reason to recommend as a good buying choice." [X-bit Labs | Meet Socket AM3: AMD Phenom II X4 810 CPU Review]

RegHardware reviewed the 2.6GHz X4 810 and a 2.8GHz X3 720 Black Edition:

"Our main finding is that DDR 2 and DDR 3 deliver the same performance with Phenom II, and it doesn't matter whether you use DDR 3 at 1333MHz or 1600MHz. If you're running your CPU at stock speeds then DDR 3 saves some 10W, but when you overclock the CPU the difference in power draw is negligible. ... The introduction of DDR 3 doesn't make a fundamental difference to Phenom II, but the new Socket AM3 processors deliver plenty of bangs for your buck and put AMD right back in the game." [RegHardware | AMD Phenom II Socket AM3 processor]

ExtremeTech tested the AMD Phenom II X4 Model 810 socket AM3 processor:

"From a buyer's perspective, the Phenom II model 810 is priced a little lower than Intel's Core 2 Quad Q8200. In most consumer and office applications, the two platforms essentially achieve performance parity. The exception, of course, is digital photography. If you're heavily into digital photography, you'll want to remain firmly in the Intel camp. ... The Phenom II model 810 represents a reasonable buy currently-but we expect its overall lifespan to be somewhat limited." [ExtremeTech | AMD Socket AM3 CPUs Ship--Phenom II 810 Review]

The best feature I see about these new Socket AM3 processors is that they don't necessarily need to be used with an 'official' AM3 motherboard. Most AM2+ motherboards would work just fine, although of course you'll still be using DDR2 memory (which at present DDR3 prices, is a financial advantage). These AM3 processors are indeed good news to folks who are looking for more value for their money. Those already running an AMD system with an AM2+ mobo just upgrade to the new processors without the need to upgrade to a new chipset. If you then decide to upgrade to a DDR3 system, you can do so later on.

IceRocket : amd, ddr3, phenom ii, socket am3

Triple-channel DDR3 RAM is here, and Tom's Hardware took a good look at twelve (12) 6Gb triple channel DDR3 kits from A-Data, Aeneon, Corsair, Crucial, G.Skill, Geil, Kingston, Mushkin, OCZ, Patriot Memory, Super Talent, and Wintec Industries.

      Test Configuration:

Intel Core i7 920 2.66 GHz, 8.0 MB L3 Cache processor Asus P6T Deluxe BIOS 1003 (12/05/2008) Intel X58/ICH10R Chipset, LGA-1366 motherboard Gigabyte GV-R487-512H-B HD 4870 GPU (750 MHz), GDDR5-3600 graphics card Western Digital WD5000AAKS, 500 GB 7,200 RPM, SATA 3 Gb/s, 16 MB cache HDD Coolermaster RS850-EMBA (850W, ATX12V v2.2) PSU Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 operating system

      DDR3 Kits:

Super Talent 1333 WA133UX6G8 (US$150)

        Patriot Viper 1600 PVT36G1600LLK ($178)

OCZ Intel Extreme 1600 OCZ3X1600LV6GK ($190) Wintec AMPX 1600 3AHX1600C8WS6GTK ($200)

        Mushkin Enhanced 1600 Model 998679 ($220)

G.Skill DDR3-1600 F3-12800CL8T-6GBHK ($230) A-data Vitesta 1600 AD31600E002GMU3K ($300) Aeneon Xtune 1600 AXH860UD20-16H-K-6G ($300) Geil Value DDR3-1600 GV36GB1600C8TC ($369)

        Crucial Ballistix 1600 BL3KIT25664BN1608 ($374)

Corsair Dominator 1866 TR3X6G1866C9DF ($410) Kingston DDR3-2000 KHX16000D3ULT1K3/6GX ($540)

"This would be a good time to remind everyone that today's competition targets the high-end market, where speed is more important than cost and the best product wins. From that, we can easily choose the winner, since Kingston was the only brand able to deliver DDR3-2000 before our deadline and no other modules could even reach Kingston's rated speed, let alone its overclocked speed. ... [but] Because the Kingston modules we received were improperly documented, a lack of availability under the original name lead us towards second-place overclocker Crucial Ballistix. While Ballistix DDR3-1600 remains an excellent option for those who need their order to ship today, near-term availability makes Kingston HyperX DDR3-2000 CAS 8 our choice for system overclocking articles. It's also a great option for high-market buyers who want the best of everything." [Tom's Hardware | Triple-Channel DDR3: 6GB Kit Roundup]

While the Kingston DDR3-2000 KHX16000D3ULT1K3/6GX and Crucial Ballistix 1600 BL3KIT25664BN1608 got top honors on the round-up, Tom's Hardware also gives honorable mention to the Mushkin Enhanced 1600 Model 998679 and Patriot Viper 1600 PVT36G1600LLK. If you are gearing up to build that Core i7 rig, the above-mentioned 6GB DDR3 Kits are the ones to look for.

IceRocket : 6gb, ddr3, triple channel

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 285 (about $400) was recently released. It is based on the GT200 Core Code, and with 55nm Manufacturing Process.

      Key Features:

240 Stream Processors 80 Texture Address / 80 Filtering 32 ROPs 648MHz Core Clock 1476MHz Shader Clock 1242MHz Memory Clock 512-bit Memory Bus Width 1GB Frame Buffer 55nm Manufacturing Process GT200 Core Code

Guru of 3D reviewed the EVGA GeForce GTX 285 SSC, Inno3D GeForce GTX 285 OC, and Point of View GeForce GTX 285 EXO. The eVGA was the Top Pick:

"... the GeForce GTX 280 was the fastest single GPU on the globe, the GeForce GTX 285 is now the fastest single GPU on the globe. On average it's roughly 10% faster than the reference GTX 280. So an upgrade towards the 55nm node did bring in some additional gaming performance." [Guru3D | GeForce GTX 285 review]

HotHardware tested an EVGA GeForce GTX 285 SSC and a GeForce GTX 285 reference card:

"The new GeForce GTX 285's performance falls right where you'd expect it to--just slightly ahead of the GeForce GTX 280, but behind the flagship GTX 295. Throughout our testing, the reference GeForce GTX 285 performed right about on par with, or barely faster than a GTX 280. However the higher core, shader, and memory clock frequencies of the EVGA GeForce GTX 285 SSE Edition gave it a larger edge in performance over the GTX 280. Overall, the dual-GPU powered Radeon HD 4870 X2 and GeForce GTX 295 are faster and more powerful than the GTX 285 in games that scale well with multi-GPU configurations, but the GeForce GTX 285 is the fastest single-GPU powered graphics card available today, hands down." [HotHardware | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285 Unveiled]

PCPerspective tested the BFG GeForce GTX 285 OCX 1GB and ASUS ENGTX285 TOP 1GB cards:

"... the GeForce GTX 285 is definitely using less power than the GTX 280 card all while running at higher clock speeds and performing better in our gaming tests. The 55nm process might not have paid off as much of a dividend as we were initially hoping on the GT200 design but financially this is a move NVIDIA needed to make. You really can't ask for much more than that! ... If you already own a GTX 280 or even at GTX 260 card, I don't think the GTX 285 is going to add enough performance to warrant the upgrade price but users of the 9-series cards or even 3000-series card from AMD should definitely perk up their ears a bit with the release." [PCPerspective | 55nm GT200: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285 1GB Review]

HardwareZone tested the Zotac GeForce GTX 285 AMP! Edition 1GB GDDR3:

"... unlike the GeForce GTX 295, the GeForce GTX 285 is not as groundbreaking and its successes are no where near the scale of that achieved by its more powerful sibling. Sure, it does improve upon performance and efficiency, but it's not to the same extent as what the GeForce GTX 295 did. And without a Radeon HD 4850 X2 on hand, we cannot say with certainty if the GeForce GTX 285 is the best card in its price and performance segment. However, as far as single GPUs go, NVIDIA has clearly one-upped themselves here. The GeForce GTX 285 is certainly an improvement over the GTX 280." [HardwareZone | Cementing First Place - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285]

AnandTech tested the EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285 in single and SLI configuration:

"In summary, despite its typical 10% performance advantage, the GeForce GTX 285 offers less price/performance than the GTX 280. The closest price competitor to the GTX 285, the Radeon HD 4870 X2, also offers better value, but at a higher price. At the same time, we have reservations about putting our weight behind the 4870 X2 with the driver issues we've experienced lately." [AnandTech | GeForce GTX 285: 55nm Enabling Higher Performance]

Do you want or need the fastest single GPU on the planet? The GTX 285 is it. If you already have a GTX 280, don't expect much of a performance upgrade. This would be good news for those targeting the GTX 280, since it would surely get more price cuts as the GTX 285 goes mainstream.

IceRocket : nvidia geforce gtx 285

The new AMD Phenom II X4 processors have arrived. Initially, two models are available: AMD Phenom II X4 920 at $236 (2.8 GHz)

AMD Phenom II X4 940 at $278 (3.0 GHz)

      Features:

Codename: Deneb Socket AM2+ - 940-pin organic micro Pin Grid Array (micro-PGA) L1 Cache (Instruction + Data): 128KB x4 (64KB + 64KB for each core) L2 Cache: 512KB x4 (quad-core); 512x3 (triple-core) L3 Cache: 6MB Shared L3 45-nanometer SOI (silicon-on-insulator) technology One 16-bit/16-bit link @ up to 3600MT/s full duplex; or up to 14.4GB/s I/O Bandwidth Integrated DDR2 memory controller-up to 17.1GB/sec dual channel memory bandwidth PC2 8500 (DDR2-1066) ; PC2 6400 (DDR2-800); PC2 5300 (DDR2-667); PC2 4200 (DDR2-533); PC2 3200 (DDR2-400) DDR2 unbuffered

Guru3D was pleased with the Phenom II X4 processors, and gave them its 'Great Value' stamp of approval:

"AMD is back on track for sure. Now before we really dig into the conclusion, let's get one thing out of the way first. Make no mistake, AMD is still a step behind Intel. Intel recently introduced Core i7 and we've shown it throughout this review, among that processor series is the Core i7 920 processor, priced close to today's tested Phenom II X4 940. And again; make no mistake, the Intel Core i7 920 processor on average is simply faster. Especially in most desktop applications, hyper-threading kicks in hard for Core i7. It's however also a much more expensive upgrade." [Guru3D | AMD Phenom II X4 920 and 940]

Tom's Hardware gave it its seldom-granted Recommended Buy award:

"Compared to AMD's first quad-core processor, the Phenom, its Phenom II successor offers great improvements, particularly in the area of energy consumption. With all due respect to Intel and the performance milestones it has achieved, the Phenom II offers a better energy consumption profile than either the Core i7 or Core 2 Quad platforms. ... In the overall competition, where the first line of attack appears in the price segment between $250 and $400, the AMD Phenom II processors place smack in between the already fading Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, and the new Core i7 920 CPUs. Above all, a complete Core i7 system costs more than a Phenom II because that Intel configuration requires a high-end motherboard and triple-channel DDR3 memory." [Tom's Hardware | AMD Phenom II X4]

HotHardware gave the Phenom II X4 940 its Recommended stamp of approval:

"The new Phenom II X4 920 and 940 are easily the most powerful desktop processors released from AMD to date. They performed well throughout our entire battery of benchmark tests, besting AMD's previous flagship CPU, the Phenom X4 9950 virtually across the board. Unfortunately, the new Phenom II X4 920 and 940 could quite keep pace with Intel's Penryn-based Core 2 Quads or Nehalem-based Core i7s. The Phenom II X4 managed to pull ahead of the Q9400, Q9650, and i7 920 on a few instances, but overall Intel's platform was still faster. The gap has closed quite a bit, however." [HotHardware | AMD Phenom II X4 940]

AnandTech picks the Phenom II X4 940 over the Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400:

"Compared to the Core 2 Quad Q9400, the Phenom II X4 940 is clearly the better pick. While it's not faster across the board, more often than not the 940 is equal to or faster than the Q9400. If Intel can drop the price of the Core 2 Quad Q9550 to the same price as the Phenom II X4 940 then the recommendation goes back to Intel. The Q9550 is generally faster than the 940, more overclockable at lower voltages, and a high enough default clock speed to keep you happy in the long run. ... If you have a Socket-AM2+ motherboard with BIOS support for Phenom II there's no question - Phenom II is the best upgrade path for you. If you are trying to build a new system from scratch, I'd suggest waiting for either the Socket-AM3 CPUs or see what Intel does with its pricing later this month." [AnandTech | AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920]

HardwareZone sees that the Phenom II can compete with the lesser Core i7 models:

"Once AMD frames the argument as a platform comparison, the Phenom II as part of the Dragon platform actually looks quite competitive with Intel's lesser Core i7 models. While the top Phenom II X4 940 is expected to retail for US$275, making it comparable in price to the Core i7-920, the cost of the motherboard and DDR3 memory pushes the Core i7 setup much higher. The Phenom II X4 920 meanwhile is at US$235. So you can either save some money for less performance or if you're willing to fork out a similar amount, upgrade the graphics, hard drive and even memory on the AMD setup to arrive at a similar or better performance level." [HardwareZone | AMD Phenom II]

X-bit Labs believes the new Phenom II X4 processors only bests the previous generation Phenom X4:

"However, all the changes in the AMD quad-core processor lineup seem significant enough only when compared against the previous generation Phenom X4, and not against their competitors. It took AMD way too long to switch to 45nm manufacturing technology and launch their Phenom II X4. They missed the window of opportunity and the launch of Phenom II X4 doesn't have the desired effect on the market. The new Phenom II X4 doesn't look too impressive against the background of contemporary Core 2 Quad and especially Core i7 CPUs. The results of our tests show that the top Phenom II X4 processors can only be worthy rivals to the Core 2 Quad CPUs from the "junior" Q8000 series. Unfortunately, Phenom II X4 cannot yet do better than that." [X-bit Labs | Phenom II X4]

ExtremeTech finds the Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition with a good price/performance ratio:

"Still, at its price, Phenom II is a reasonable alternative to Intel in most segments. We would generally avoid it for photo or video work, but for general productivity and gaming, it's a pretty cost effective answer to Intel. ... The bottom line is that AMD has finally caught up with Intel's last generation-sort of. So if you're looking to build a system that offers good price/performance and a relatively low entry cost, the AMD's Phenom II makes a fine choice. But if you want maximum performance, you'll want Core i7." [ExtremeTech | AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition]

PC Perspective sees the Phenom II to appeal to budget enthusiasts:

"Enthusiasts who lean towards AMD will have another toy to play with, and one they should have a good time hanging out with. The price is certainly right, and the base performance competes well with similarly priced Intel parts. We also have a good selection of motherboards that should appeal to the budget enthusiast, as well as higher end products that offer features comparable to high end Intel based boards for significantly less money. ... For the first 45 nm product out of the gates, AMD has at least executed on time and in a fairly efficient manner. I have not heard any rumors of major issues with the new design (eg. No TLB type errata), and the initial products are coming out at an aggressive clockspeed and thermal envelope." [PC Perspective | AMD Phenom II X4 940]

      Comments on Overclocking:

"Value for money, that's what you need to remember, and the Dragon combo CPU/Mobo/GPU without doubt offers that. Also, and I just have to mention this, a pleasant surprise was the level of overclocking. If you make sure you have a decent cooler (we used the OCZ Vendetta 2 btw), it should be fairly easy to reach 3.7 - 3.8 GHz clock frequencies. Likely with decent water-cooling we'd end up at 4.0 GHz. So there's definitely some overclocking headroom as well. And most definitely more headroom to work with compared to the previous generation products." [Guru3D]

"With all of the information AMD has already revealed regarding the Phenom II's overclockability, we were eager to see what our particular chip could do. We didn't use any exotic cooling for our overclocking experiments, opting instead to see just how far the chip would go with a stock AMD PIB air cooler installed. With only a minor bump in voltage to 1.575v, we were able to take our particular CPU to almost 3.8GHz using the stock air cooler alone. That speed was achieved with an 18.5x multiplier and a 202MHz base clock; the components were installed in a basic mid-tower. The AMD Overdrive utility shown in the screenshot above did not report clock speeds correctly, but assuming thermal readings were correct (we don't think they were), the chip ran at about 50'C while overclocked." [HotHardware]

"The clocking situation improved greatly with our 940 once VCore rose to a final 1.52V. We actually hit 4GHz but needed 1.58V to do it. This resulted in a few crashes due to temperatures, but we also noticed our particular CPU sample just was not stable at 4GHz+ even with additional voltages and cooling. The results for the two Intel processors are simply superb in this particular test with the 9950BE managing a respectable 30% improvement in clock speeds, matching that of the Phemom II percentage wise." [AnandTech]

"With the expected greater overclocking headroom of the new Phenom II, one could find more enthusiasts jumping onto this platform. Taking the new chip by itself, despite its improvements over the original Phenom, it's not going to threaten the Core i7 directly performance-wise. Its greatest achievement is its reduced power consumption, especially when idle. Going to 45nm has been significant, not only in pushing up the clock speeds but also in lowering heat/power consumption. As we have seen, these excellent numbers have come from AMD's 125W Phenom II models. The upcoming 95W AM3 versions could feature more impressive power draw figures." [HardwareZone]

"So, new Phenom II X4 processors do have very good frequency potential: the top model overclocked by 26% with air cooling only. So, the new AMD processor seems to be quite fit for overclocking experiments. However, we would like to make sure that potential Phenom II X4 owners keep in mind: 3.8GHz frequency will not let a CPU on Stars (K10) microarchitecture work as fast as overclocked Core 2 Quad from the same price range could." [X-bit Labs]

"We initially ran into some pretty severe difficulties in overclocking the 940. ... When we set the BIOS memory settings to "Auto", which ran the memory at DDR2-800 speeds, we finally managed to push the model 940 to 3.5GHz with excellent stability, using the Arctic Cooling Freezer 64. With a more robust cooler and more voltage tweaking, we might have gone higher." [ExtremeTech]

"My results did not reach the 6 GHz heights that AMD showed off last month, but considering how poor of an overclocker I am, my results are quite respectable for air cooling and a minimal amount of effort. Using stock voltage I was able to take the Phenom II X4 940 to 3.5 GHz on air cooling. My final overclock was at 3.8 GHz with a voltage of 1.45v. This is pretty close to the 4 GHz mark that AMD says is quite achievable with a good portion of their parts on air cooling. Again, I am not the world's greatest overclocker and I am not a big fan of frying processors. 3.8 GHz with minimal effort is a nice accomplishment, and certainly the 3.5 GHz mark at stock voltage is probably the real winner here." [PC Perspective]

The bottom line is that the new AMD Phenom II X4 processors are not the "Core i7 killers" a lot of people hoped them to be. Despite that, the Phenom II, partnered with a 790GX chipset motherboards, prove to be a good budget enthusiast platform. Overclocking is more feasible with the Phenom II, when compared to the previous Phenom X4 processors, but the Core i7 processors are still easier to overclock. If you need to build a new system now, going with the Phenom II platform would be the one with the best value. If not, it would be best to wait for the soon to arrive AM3 socket processors.

IceRocket : amd phenom ii x4 45nm am2+

X-bit Labs tested 16 different thermal compounds, and compared their efficiency on an overclocked Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 (3.0GHz, 1.25V, 2x6MB L2 cache, 4x333MHz FSB, Yorkfield, C0) processor, and a HIS Radeon HD 4870 GDDR5 512MB / 256bit, @830 (300) / 3600MHz graphics card.

      Thermal Compounds tested:



        Arctic Silver 5

Pro-Thermal 81 IC Diamond 7 Carat AiT Cool Silver Arctic Alumina OCZ Ultra 5+ Silver (OCZU5STP)

        OCZ Freeze Extreme (OCZTFRZTC)

Zalman ZM-STG1 ZEROtherm ZT-100 Noctua NT-H1 Tuniq TX-2 Arctic Cooling MX-2

        Coollaboratory Liquid MetalPad


        Coollaboratory Liquid Pro

Gelid GC1 SilMORE (usually bundled with some Scythe, Thermaltake, Xigmatek, Ice Hammer, OCZ CPU coolers)

"As for the winners, I can certainly single out liquid metal from Coollaboratory and Coollaboratory Liquid MetalPad with a few remarks regarding its proper use that should be taken into account. The new OCZ Freeze Extreme performed extremely well as a highly efficient, relatively inexpensive and very easy to work with. The good old Arctic Silver 5 still holds on to its leading position successfully, although now it has at least eight worthy competitors to worry about. Overall, it is very pleasing to see that there are more than 2-3 worthy thermal interfaces around. And of course, do not forget that thermal interface is simply a substance to fill into the micro-pores between the cooler base and the processor heat-spreader. You have to make sure that both these surfaces are very even, because no "millimeter" layer of thermal compound usually applied by newbies and several "experienced" testers out there will guarantee efficient cooling and objective cooler comparison." [X-bit Labs | Thermal Interfaces Roundup]

X-bit labs suggests that we stay away from the bundled SilMORE thermal compound, and try to avoid AiT Cool Silver, Pro-Thermal 81, and Zalman ZM-STG1.

IceRocket : arctic silver, coolaboratory liquid, grease, ocz freeze, thermal compound

X-bit Labs tested 16 different thermal compounds, and compared their efficiency on an overclocked Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 (3.0GHz, 1.25V, 2x6MB L2 cache, 4x333MHz FSB, Yorkfield, C0) processor, and a HIS Radeon HD 4870 GDDR5 512MB / 256bit, @830 (300) / 3600MHz graphics card.

      Thermal Compounds tested:



        Arctic Silver 5

Pro-Thermal 81 IC Diamond 7 Carat AiT Cool Silver Arctic Alumina OCZ Ultra 5+ Silver (OCZU5STP)

        OCZ Freeze Extreme (OCZTFRZTC)

Zalman ZM-STG1 ZEROtherm ZT-100 Noctua NT-H1 Tuniq TX-2 Arctic Cooling MX-2

        Coollaboratory Liquid MetalPad


        Coollaboratory Liquid Pro

Gelid GC1 SilMORE (usually bundled with some Scythe, Thermaltake, Xigmatek, Ice Hammer, OCZ CPU coolers)

"As for the winners, I can certainly single out liquid metal from Coollaboratory and Coollaboratory Liquid MetalPad with a few remarks regarding its proper use that should be taken into account. The new OCZ Freeze Extreme performed extremely well as a highly efficient, relatively inexpensive and very easy to work with. The good old Arctic Silver 5 still holds on to its leading position successfully, although now it has at least eight worthy competitors to worry about. Overall, it is very pleasing to see that there are more than 2-3 worthy thermal interfaces around. And of course, do not forget that thermal interface is simply a substance to fill into the micro-pores between the cooler base and the processor heat-spreader. You have to make sure that both these surfaces are very even, because no "millimeter" layer of thermal compound usually applied by newbies and several "experienced" testers out there will guarantee efficient cooling and objective cooler comparison." [X-bit Labs | Thermal Interfaces Roundup]

X-bit labs suggests that we stay away from the bundled SilMORE thermal compound, and try to avoid AiT Cool Silver, Pro-Thermal 81, and Zalman ZM-STG1.

IceRocket : arctic silver, coolaboratory liquid, grease, ocz freeze, thermal compound

HotHardware compared two graphics cards based on the ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2. The cards were:

Asus Radeon HD 4870 X2 Top (EAH4870X2 TOP) MSI Radeon HD 4870 X2 OC Edition (R4870X2-T2D2G-OC)

Tom's Hardware also compared four graphics cards. The cards reviewed were:

Asus Radeon HD 4870 X2 Top (EAH4870X2 TOP/HTDI/2G/A) HIS Radeon HD 4870 X2 (H487X2F2GP) MSI Radeon HD 4870 X2 OC Edition (R4870X2-T2D2G-OC) Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 (HD4870 X2 G2 GDDR5)

      ATI Radeon baseline Specs:

Codename: R700 2x1024 MB GDDR5 Memory 750MHz GPU Clock 4.1 Shader Model 3600MHz Memory Clock 2x800 Stream Processors

"As expected, the Asus EAH4870X2 TOP and MSI R4870X2-T2D2G-OC both outperformed a reference Radeon HD 4870 X2, nearly across the board. The only instance where the factory overclocked Asus and MSI cards didn't clearly outpace the reference card was in the CPU bound 3DMark06 default test. In the SM 3.0 / HDR tests build into 3DMark06, however, the Asus and MSI cards came out on the top. Overall, the Asus EAH4870X2 TOP finished just ahead of the MSI R4870X2-T2D2G-OC due to its slightly higher GPU and memory frequencies, but the performance deltas were minimal." [HotHardware | Overclocked Radeon HD 4870 X2 Shoot-Out]

HotHardware gave both cards, the Asus and MSI, its Recommended stamp.

"The Radeon HD 4870 X2 has a good cooling solution with both of its graphics chips running at full clock speed when the performance is needed. It gets clocked down when running in 2D mode and it comes with 2 x 1 GB of fast graphics memory for high-resolution environments with lots of visual detail. AMD has certainly done a very good job." [Tom's Hardware | Radeon HD 4870 X2: Four Cards Compared]

Tom's Hardware gave the Sapphire its best-buy recommendation. Likewise, the Asus (for fan profiles and overclocking) and MSI (aggressive thermal profiling, resulting in lowered GPU temps) were also recommended.

IceRocket : amd, ati, radeon hd 4870 x2

HotHardware compared two graphics cards based on the ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2. The cards were:

Asus Radeon HD 4870 X2 Top (EAH4870X2 TOP) MSI Radeon HD 4870 X2 OC Edition (R4870X2-T2D2G-OC)

Tom's Hardware also compared four graphics cards. The cards reviewed were:

Asus Radeon HD 4870 X2 Top (EAH4870X2 TOP/HTDI/2G/A) HIS Radeon HD 4870 X2 (H487X2F2GP) MSI Radeon HD 4870 X2 OC Edition (R4870X2-T2D2G-OC) Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 (HD4870 X2 G2 GDDR5)

      ATI Radeon baseline Specs:

Codename: R700 2x1024 MB GDDR5 Memory 750MHz GPU Clock 4.1 Shader Model 3600MHz Memory Clock 2x800 Stream Processors

"As expected, the Asus EAH4870X2 TOP and MSI R4870X2-T2D2G-OC both outperformed a reference Radeon HD 4870 X2, nearly across the board. The only instance where the factory overclocked Asus and MSI cards didn't clearly outpace the reference card was in the CPU bound 3DMark06 default test. In the SM 3.0 / HDR tests build into 3DMark06, however, the Asus and MSI cards came out on the top. Overall, the Asus EAH4870X2 TOP finished just ahead of the MSI R4870X2-T2D2G-OC due to its slightly higher GPU and memory frequencies, but the performance deltas were minimal." [HotHardware | Overclocked Radeon HD 4870 X2 Shoot-Out]

HotHardware gave both cards, the Asus and MSI, its Recommended stamp.

"The Radeon HD 4870 X2 has a good cooling solution with both of its graphics chips running at full clock speed when the performance is needed. It gets clocked down when running in 2D mode and it comes with 2 x 1 GB of fast graphics memory for high-resolution environments with lots of visual detail. AMD has certainly done a very good job." [Tom's Hardware | Radeon HD 4870 X2: Four Cards Compared]

Tom's Hardware gave the Sapphire its best-buy recommendation. Likewise, the Asus (for fan profiles and overclocking) and MSI (aggressive thermal profiling, resulting in lowered GPU temps) were also recommended.

IceRocket : amd, ati, radeon hd 4870 x2

Tom's Hardware rounded up 4GB DDR2 memory kits from Corsair, Crucial, Geil, Kingston, Mushkin, OCZ, and Walton Chaintech. Tom's Hardware gave the Recommended Buy award to the Kingston HyperX KHX8500D2K2/4G and Mushkin's Ascent XP2-8500:

"... Kingston and Mushkin. And it's these last two brands that went through our testing without reaching remarkable records, but also without failing on us in any category. Power consumption and operating voltage were in line with our expectations, especially for Mushkin. Overclocking margins were small, but we guess almost everyone agrees when we say that there is not much more you can do today, and that the difference is small. Finally, their price tags of $150 turn these two products into the most attractive memory kits for upgraders or anyone else who is about to assemble a reasonable desktop PC with 4 GB of main memory." [Tom's Hardware | DDR2-1066 Kit Round-Up]

To add, Tom's Hardware gives us their recommendations for memory purchases:

Stay within the market sweet spot to get a good deal: today that's 2x 1 GB or 2x 2 GB of DDR2-800 or DDR2-1066 memory. Look for quick timings (smaller numbers are better), but don't spend substantial money on slightly faster modules. Spend additional budget on a faster processor, a faster graphics card graphics card or a faster drive instead of fast memory, unless you need overclocking memory.

        Always get as few memory modules as possible, but equip all memory channels of a system to get maximum performance. The ideal configuration consists of two DIMMs today, and three DIMMs with Intel's upcoming Core i7 systems.

        Go for name brand memory.

It should be noted that 4GB of RAM can't be fully utilized on a 32-bit operating system. You will get around 3.3 to 3.7 GB of effective memory capacity.

Technorati : 1066, 4gb, 8500, ddr2, memory

The AMD 790GX is an integrated graphics chipset that has the following features:

HT 3.0/5,200 MT/s Processor Interface PCI Express 2.0/26 lanes/2x8 Graphics support RV610 integrated core (same with AMD 780G) DirectX 10.1 / OpenGL 2.1 700 MHz Graphics Clock DisplayPort, HDMI, DVI, VGA Display Outputs Hybrid CrossFireX, CrossFireX Multi-GPU support SB750 Southbridge (AMD 780G uses SB700) A-Link Xpress (4 x PCIe 1.1) Interconnect RAID 0, 1, 10, 5 support (AMD 780G lacked RAID 5)

Tom's Hardware compared the Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H (790GX) with the Gigabyte MA78GPM-D2SH (780G) and ASUS M3N78 PRO (GeForce 8300) motherboards:

"... The SB750 is AMD's real strength here. Otherwise, we'd probably go for the inexpensive 780G with a Radeon HD 3870 or 4850. But with ACC and RAID 5 support wrapped up into AMD's new southbridge, the company finally has a platform to tie the assets it acquired from ATI into its own processor lineup. Naturally, it helps that the onboard RV610 core is now running at 700 MHz and aided by side-port memory. The main story here is ACC and what AMD is doing to make its processors more attractive in the face of a formidable opponent." [Tom's Hardware | AMD 790GX: RV610 For Enthusiasts?]

AnandTech previewed the 790GX:

"The 790GX Northbridge is actually a 780G that has its stock core clock speed increased from 500MHz to 700MHz along with a graphics core name change from Radeon HD 3200 to HD 3300. Sideport Memory, now called Performance Cache, is a "requested" feature on the boards that improves IG performance about 5% on average, sometimes less, sometimes more. The SB750 Southbridge is basically a SB700 with RAID 5 operation and the new ACC interface. Mix the two parts, stir, and you have the highest performing integrated graphics solution on the market today." [AnandTech | AMD 790GX - The Introduction]

The bottom line is that if you are decided with going with the AMD chipset route for your system build, the 790GX is the right choice if you need RAID 5, and are interested in some overclocking (thanks to the Advanced Clock Calibration).

Technorati : 780g, 790gx, 8300, amd, chipset, graphics, igp, integrated, nvidia, overclock, review, test

The EVGA nForce 750i SLI FTW ($US200) is a motherboard for Intel that features:

Intel Core 2 Extreme, Core 2 Quad, Core 2 Duo, Pentium EE, Pentium D, & Pentium processor support Nvidia nForce 750i SLI MCP and SPP chipset dual channel DDR2-800 memory support, up to 8GB 8x USB 2.0 ports 4x Serial ATA II, with RAID 0, 1, 0+1, 5, and JBOD Gb LAN 2x 1394a ports Azalia High-Definition audio 2x PCI Express v2.0 x16 slots

"... users who would like to build an SLI graphics subsystem have very limited options when it comes to choosing mainboards for LGA 775 processors. Nvidia nForce 6 series doesn't support contemporary Intel processors, NVIDIA nForce 780i SLI and nForce 750i SLI run very warm and unstable during overclocking. ... we can only leave the decision making to SLI fans here. You may either use only one graphics card, or give up CPU overclocking altogether or overclock to pretty mediocre speeds. You may wait for new Nvidia chipsets or even switch to ATI graphics cards. The choice is yours, and at this time we cannot recommend any Nvidia nForce 750i SLI based mainboards. None of them are really good, so no wonder very few companies have them in their product range." [X-bit Labs | EVGA nForce 750i SLI FTW Mainboard Review: Rehabilitated?]

As it seems, overclocking fans won't be interested in the nForce 750i SLI mobos. If you just have to have a system with an Intel processor and 2 graphics cards in SLI, probably the best way to have it is to run it at stock speeds.

Technorati : 750i, evga, intel, motherboard, nforce, nvidia, review, sli

The Phenom X3 8750 is a processor from AMD that has the following features:

2.4GHz AM2+ three cores

        AMD Balanced Smart Cache, a shared L3 cache of up to 2MB between the cores (in addition to 512K L2 cache per core)



          HyperTransport technology





            Integrated memory controller bypasses a discreet memory controller for faster, more streamline memory access to DDR2 system RAM







          ExtremeTech put the Phenom 8750 head-to-head with an Intel Core 2 Duo E8400:







          "AMD has an excellent argument for going with a CPU with an odd number of cores. The triple-core equipped CPU performed admirably most of the time. ,,, If you consider that it runs at a mere 2.4GHz compared to the 3.0GHz Core 2 Duo we tested it against, you must conclude that the extra core had, at the very least, some positive effect on the benchmark results. ... at its factory frequency, it's a solid contender in the midrange CPU market-something AMD hasn't been able to brag about in a very long time.

            " [





                        ExtremeTech | 8750 Review





            ]







            Then the Phenom 8750 was overclocked:







          "The battle was finally over. I threw up my white flag, once again a victim of a Phenom CPU with very little factory overspec to speak of." [ExtremeTech | 8750 Overclocking]







            So is the Phenom X3 8750 worth it? I say yes. Just don't have your hopes up on having a decent overclock.

Technorati : 8750, amd, overclock, phenom, processor, test, x3