benchmark request! which cpu best for today and tomorrow?

[mysteryman]

I am wondering which is faster!?

1) 2.4c @ 3.4 GHz @ 283 FSB @ 453 DDR

or

2) 2.6c @ 3.4 GHz @ 261 FSB @ 418 DDR

or

3) 2.6c @ 3.4 GHz @ 261 FSB @ 522 DDR (1:1) (possible in near future?)

or

4) 2.8c @ 3.4 GHz @ 243 FSB @ 486 DDR (1:1)

or

5) 3.0c @ 3.4 GHz @ 227 FSB @ 453 DDR (1:1)

It would seem to me #3 would be the fastest setup if you could
hit 522DDR with the new memory that's coming out. The reason
I ask is cause I am concerned not only with performance of my
machine right now, but also a year or two down the road when
faster memory will be available....

Seems to me #4 and #5 are bad buys because you won't be able
to take advantage of faster memory as it becomes available....

I am making assumption that all of these cpu's can overclock to
about 3.4 GHz...

Thoughts?

[eva2000]

fastest for overall system would have to be #1

[Chuck232]

Well, it's a bit of a tough call. I'd say it'd be between the #1 and #3. #1 has the highest FSB bandwidth, but not as much memory bandwidth to saturate it. #4 only has a slightly lower FSB bandwidth but a much higher memory bandwidth... But also, you could probably do better timings at DDR453 that at DDR522

But I guess #3 would cost you a lot more for the 2.6C over the 2.4C and the really good RAM to run at DDR522. No RAM is guaranteed at this speed so it'd be a risk.

[mysteryman]

Yeah, I was thinking maybe I'd get a 2.6c with el cheapo memory
and then upgrade in a year or so to good ddr522 memory.
Want to squeeze the most life out of my system as I have
limited funds...

Seems 2.4c would be great if one day there was ddr566!

everyone agree 2.8c and 3.0c are not good if you plan on
keeping your system awhile?

[Jim]

I went throught the Overclockers drive-thru and ordered a number 1. :)

[Hawk]

Mysterman,

You know what, I can't even answer that because, faster in what?

Benchmarks, games, applications, etc. . . . .

I attached a copy of my CPU mark. 3.0C at 240FSB. . . .

[ThugsRook]

if you are going to get "stuck" with this system for a long time ~ get the system that is memory limited right now (2.4c 2.6c) cause eventually better DDR ram will be available for cheap once DDRII becomes available.

in otherwords ~ it will leave you a pretty decent upgrade path for cheap in the future w/o spending too much right now.

HTH :)

[mysteryman]

Hawk: could you run your 3.0c at 227 fsb and post the new results?

Thugsrook, I think I am in agreement with you...

Except I remember someone saying that their 2.4c underperformed
the 2.8c at the same frequency and he couldn't figure out why.

Hmmmm....

[JoeBar]

This is a 3.00C running @ 3.40ghz (227mhz fsb)


http://users.panafonet.gr/gakrivos/p4c800old/sandracpu.JPG

[Hawk]

Mysteryman, here you go, FSB 227. . . .








Originally posted by mysteryman
Hawk: could you run your 3.0c at 227 fsb and post the new results?

Thugsrook, I think I am in agreement with you...

Except I remember someone saying that their 2.4c underperformed
the 2.8c at the same frequency and he couldn't figure out why.

Hmmmm....

[mysteryman]

Thanks guys! It appears #1 and #5 get about the same
performance. Which makes sense... Would have thought
the asynchronous memory ratios on #1 would slow it down
a bit though.

Of course, I have no idea what the memory timings were...

Now to find a 2.4c that can overclock that good!

[Flamer]

Well here is a bench of a 3.06 at 148 fsb 3.4 gig.