MachII & Prescott advice

I have a Mach II on the way this week and with Prescott around the corner I'm looking for some advice on the best Prescott chip to run with my current system.

P4C800E-dlx (am going to do the Vdimm mod on it)
OCZ Gold 4000 (cpu limits me to 260 1:1 so far)

I reckon with more volts I could get the ram to 270 1:1, maybe.

Assuming I can get a Prescott chip that flies (luck required as always) would I be better getting the 3.2 so I can run the mem 1:1 ie 265x16 would be nice :) or would the 2.8 with a higher fsb be better and run the mem at 5:4. Maybe even the 3.0 would be possible for 1:1 with 270! I really can't decide which would be better.


Any suggestions anyone ? No cash left for anything else after Prescott & Prommy so what I have will have to do :)

you'll probably want to run a divider since you should do 5GHz easy by my reckoning. (32 stage pipe / 90nm) :cool:

I say, go for the 3.2 :D

yup, im going for the 3.2P coze if it dont OC like they saying i steal have a good clock. but from what ive heard they should do very easy 280X15. But please dont cote me on this coze thats what ive heard, and it still make sens coze of 32 pipe stage and 90Nm

Quote:

---

you'll probably want to run a divider since you should do 5GHz easy by my reckoning

---

5000 Mhz easy?
Has anybody overclocked a Prescott yet?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by skate2snow
yup, im going for the 3.2P coze if it dont OC like they saying i steal have a good clock. but from what ive heard they should do very easy 280X15. But please dont cote me on this coze thats what ive heard, and it still make sens coze of 32 pipe stage and 90Nm

---

skate,
I'm sure you meant 280x16 ? :)

I thought there was a 3.4 Prescott coming as well. I know the 3.4P EE is delayed, but I haven't heard of the 3.4P being delayed.

I've heard something about that the first prescott CPU's that come out, will not be good overclockers, and later they will be...is this true?

its just assumption based on the northwoods.... (first ones were bollocks for overclocking and the later ones are sweet)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PyroTeknik
its just assumption based on the northwoods.... (first ones were bollocks for overclocking and the later ones are sweet)

---

oh ok. I guess we whont know before the prescotts have been out for a while ;)

Im thinking of buying a Prescott myself, but not if they suck in overclocking. Overclocking is over half the fun!;)

It's also strange for the EU to get them first. Maybe the first shipments went there..... and they are the bad ones.... no offense to the EU.. we'll all see...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by oc-rookie
It's also strange for the EU to get them first. Maybe the first shipments went there..... and they are the bad ones.... no offense to the EU.. we'll all see...

---

Why is it so strange that we get them first? I feel that it's our turn now to get something before you guys :p:

some are saying they will be some OC beast and other are saying they will S*CK for OC. Personally i think the Prescott will OC like beast, 90Nm and 32 stage pipes cant give poorer OC

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gef
I've heard something about that the first prescott CPU's that come out, will not be good overclockers, and later they will be...is this true?

---

That is how it works with all hardware.

As the process is refined they start pumping out higher quality silicon. Think of the first AXP processors, compared with the latest steppings. Or, the early 9800 Pros compared with the newer ones...not even close.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by skate2snow
some are saying they will be some OC beast and other are saying they will S*CK for OC. Personally i think the Prescott will OC like beast, 90Nm and 32 stage pipes cant give poorer OC

---

There's also larger cache, which can make things worse...
And if performance isn't at least on pair with Northwood, 5GHz is needed for sure...

I very much doubt Prescott will OC any better than Northwood, especially at the start. There would be higher speed grades if they did OC so well. a 3.2 prescott will probably OC about the same as a 3.2 NW. We dont know how they react to more cooling and increased voltage yet of course. But for all we know, they could be worse than NW as well. 5 GHz in a Mach II isnt going to happen... Intel doesnt leave a 1 GHz aircooled OC margin on their CPUs

well said JC.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JCviggen
I very much doubt Prescott will OC any better than Northwood, especially at the start. There would be higher speed grades if they did OC so well. a 3.2 prescott will probably OC about the same as a 3.2 NW. We dont know how they react to more cooling and increased voltage yet of course. But for all we know, they could be worse than NW as well. 5 GHz in a Mach II isnt going to happen... Intel doesnt leave a 1 GHz aircooled OC margin on their CPUs

---

I disagree, for the reason of Prescott's redesign core which allows better clock distribution and longer pipeline. There are other improvements such as low-k silicon, and 7 layer copper interconnects. The only thing holding Prescott back is of course the world famous heat output. Something which can be corrected with proper cooling such as forementioned Mach II.

So you expect a 3.2 GHz chip to clock to 4.1 or 4.2 on aircooling then do you?
Even with a mach II heat transfer is still a problem. More watts, smaller surface. The leak current on the 0.09 process is much higher than on .13 which will probably mean voltage increases give you mostly a heat increase rather than a good speed increase. I dont rule out that they OC a bit better than NWs but 5 GHz is plain silly. They wouldnt have had such a hard time reaching 3.2-3.4 GHz if they overclock so nicely. And they did have a hard time, tons of them went into lower speed bins already, and others got their cache disabled and waiting to be sold as celerons.

If everything was so simple as you technically put it, AMD would be making 3 GHz chips already. Looks good on paper maybe, not so easy to make it actually work.

I think that we´ll se lots of dead Prommy cooled prescotts, in future. I lost yesterday heatspreader from my 3.2C proc. Chip looked to be just fine (even core was perfect), but it isnt working anymore :(

If Intel doesnt attach those heatpreaders better in future, we´ll se some prescotts that are missing their core, because Intel is attaching heatspreader with silverepoxy directly on the core. When the "main" epoxy that is keeping heatspreaders on the place comes off ex. under prommy, all "force" (when removing evaporator or heatsink) is against that poor little core...

I dont think it will go over 4.5GHz but i think it will OC high.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by The Stilt
I think that we´ll se lots of dead Prommy cooled prescotts, in future. I lost yesterday heatspreader from my 3.2C proc. Chip looked to be just fine (even core was perfect), but it isnt working anymore :(

If Intel doesnt attach those heatpreaders better in future, we´ll se some prescotts that are missing their core, because Intel is attaching heatspreader with silverepoxy directly on the core. When the "main" epoxy that is keeping heatspreaders on the place comes off ex. under prommy, all "force" (when removing evaporator or heatsink) is against that poor little core...

---

In a article at VR-zone they say its way harder to remove the IHS(they have a Prescott in hand), so i think that problem is solve. And the IHS have a copper mark where the core is.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kanavit
I disagree, for the reason of Prescott's redesign core which allows better clock distribution and longer pipeline. There are other improvements such as low-k silicon, and 7 layer copper interconnects.

---

Remember, all the things you list are just to be able to ramp up the speed. Increasing the lenght of the pipeline will decrease performance if the code is not optimized for it.
The 1Mb L2 will make up for it to some extent...

I think we should wait to see what it gives

Only way to find out is to wait and see...

If I were you I wouldnt consider getting a Prescott *yet*

Keep in mind that the A64 FX-53 will be comming out as well.

ATM AMD is the better alternative imho.

will prescott chips runnable on i875/i865 socket 478 mobos?

will prescott chips be runnable on i875/i865 socket 478 mobos?

Yes, all new rev of ASUS support OFFICIALY the Prescotts, but most of the older boards are supposed to support "UNOFFICIALY" the Prescotts

Abit IC7 ver 1,1
Abit IC7-G ver 1,1
Abit AI7
Abit IC7-MAX3

Those boards supports Prescott (using 478 socket) on Abit's side ;)

What about IC7-G 1.0?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by crotale
What about IC7-G 1.0?

---

They dont support Prescott, sorry :(

ONLY ver 1,1

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gef
They dont support Prescott, sorry :(

ONLY ver 1,1

---

Take a look at this link, and you will see

Edit: Sorry, i hit the quote button instead of the Edit button...:stick:

damn :(

Or it's just officiall support... 400FSB CPU's work fine for example... I'll see if I can try one...

will prescotts work on a asus p4p800 rev 1.02?

Lucky;). Its the last version, hen?? the two last version can take it(Oficialy)

wait for other people to get the prescott first. then you may just be better off getting an a64 3200+ for the same money as the prescott and youd own the prescott running that a64 at 260fsb and 2.6GHz in sync ram ;)