Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[marko]

my Athlon XP 2800+ based system has served me well over the past 5 years, but recently, I felt it was beginning to struggle with things such as converting tracks during ipod syncs, analysing audio etc. etc. so I bought me some new bits and threw them together.

I was careful, but not careful enough, getting the dimensions for the case and the 8800 out by about ¼"!! Auction purchases meant RMA's were not an option, so plan B came in the form of my Dremel!!

Games look wonderful: (click image for 1680 x 1050 version)


pc building

[johnnyboy]

So what spec is it?
The inside looks pretty choc-a-block!

[newsposter]

I'm in the middle of building a complete new system using dual Opteron 64 x2s (socket f/1207) for my photo and cad work.  It's spec-ing out (newegg.com) at just about $2000 **including** a new 24" 16x9 LCD panel.

The only variable is the CPUs.  If I get them from newegg, the pair of Opteron 2216 (SantaRosa, 2.4Gz) are $700.  However for about $600 on ebay I can get a pair of Opteron 2220 (2.8Gz) for $700.  Everything else in my system build is cheaper from newegg.com.

The current and planned summer releases of quad core from both Intel and AMD are nothing but (poorly implemented) technology demonstrators for the fan-boys who want bragging rights.  That and the fact that the Opterons still beat Xeons (not to mention desktop-oriented CPUs) on all meaningful workload benchmarks is why I'm going with that kind of system.

This system is about 50% higher than what I usually spend (once every three years) because there isn't anything from the old box (an Athlon 3000+ system) that can be moved to the new box.  A majority of the Athlon hulk will hit the trash heap (unless someone here wants to buy it fully intact, working, and ready to go for about $500 that is).

[johnnyboy]

A majority of the Athlon hulk will hit the trash heap (unless someone here wants to buy it fully intact, working, and ready to go for about $500 that is).

Lol - so you want $500 for what you are otherwise going to throw in the trash? lol.
If u give me your address I can get a flight and just wait outside the door till you throw it out lol

Just joking - your system sounds nice though, extremely high spec

[marko]

So what spec is it?
The inside looks pretty choc-a-block!

I think it's more a case of the internal case design leaving very little room for manouvre, coupled with the ridiculous size of the graphics card!

• Antec Solo Case
• Antec Neo HE 500 watt PSU
• AcoustiFan DustProof Quiet 92mm Fan - 3 pin (front intake)
• eVGA 122-CK-NF68 nForce 680i SLI (Socket 775) DDR2 Motherboard
• Intel Core 2 Duo E6700
• GeIL 2GB (2x1GB) PC6400C4 800MHz Ultra Low Latency DDR2 RAM
• eVGA GeForce 768MB GeForce 8800 GTX ACS3
• 2 x Seagate 500 GB SATA hard drives

I've a feeling that the default motherboard settings are quite relaxed, for example, the memory has defaulted to 5-5-5-18 while it allegedly supports 4-4-4-12 so I need to find the time to learn how to set it all up correctly manually.
I was really surprised by the ammount of heat this thing kicks out. It's amazing. That big north bridge heatsink came with a small fiddly 'optional' fan that reminded me of the fans you could find on old TNT2 graphics cards. I chose not to fit it as I am not overclocking atm, and after 4 days uptime, that heatsink is too hot to touch!! I might try that fan after all and see how much noise it adds to the mix.

[newsposter]

The photo images I work on start at 14 meg pix and convert to 128 mb 48 bit TIFFs for Photoshop.

CATIA (CAD) drawings are similary sized if not larger, many with over 256k worth of polygonal surfaces.

So yah, having a 2 socket, 4 core system where each core has it's own FSB into the ram and cache channels is damed important.  The AMD 1000 Mz async hyperchannel helps a lot too. The key to the efficient use of fast CPUs is fast memory and fast disk on a motherboard with a fast chipset including the memory controller(s).  If you're not willing or able to invest in fast memory and fast disk, then you may as well get slow CPUs too.

This is where Intels Core 2 and Core 4 chips fall down.  Those chips share a single FSB with the on-board cores, the processors are basicly individual cores glued together inside a standard pin-count package.  Each core has to fight the other for 'time' on the ram and cache data lines.  AMD Opterons don't have this handicap due to the multiple interfaces to the hyperchannel and that each core has it's own memory controller.

[johnnyboy]

news - I've heard people claiming that with the same data to backup their claim and 'in theory' it'd make sense but in practise from every single bench mark I've seen, the c2d's beat all the AMD ones so it would seem the practise does not match the theory for whatever reason. They've obviously done something to help balance this.

[newsposter]

AMDs desktop chips (Athlon/Sempron) do lag behind Core2 by some 5-7%.

However, I'll be using Opteron server cpus (model 2216 or 2220) on a server-grade motherboard that is running the NVidia Pro 3600 server chipset.  That specific combination runs rings around Core2 and is some 10% faster than 'equivalent' Xeon systems.  Again, because AMD has their memory controllers on the processor and has multiple memory paths from the cores to the motherboard, that advantage will hold when going with the drop-in quad cores for Socket F/1207.

Intel persists on using memory controllers in the mobo chipsets and crippling their processors/cores with memory connects that are single path.  Intel is reportedly experimenting with placing memory controllers on the processors themselves but that will require new mobo chipsets and a new socket architecture.

I'm not building a desktop/gaming machine here.