-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
PC Build - final config
- Thread starter llap
- Start date
Eric Carlson
Veteran Member
Thanks. Do you need a special SATA controller to support actually hot swapping of the drives?
--
GaySatyr
Senior Member
Theoretically, no; however, since we are not working with a dedicated array controller, I prefer not "confusing" Windows and its sometimes fragile drivers.
Besides, for the purposes of what we are doing, hot-swapping is of no real importance.
Besides, for the purposes of what we are doing, hot-swapping is of no real importance.
Eric Carlson
Veteran Member
Thanks. I was actually contemplating other potential uses where hot swapping might come in handy.
--
GaySatyr
Senior Member
Test carefully before you depend on it.
The problem is that, while the SATA II spec includes hot-swap capabilities as one of its features, there is no requirement that all features be implemented. With [most] dedicated raid array controllers, hot-swap is a selling point, implemented in both their hardware and their drivers.
The problem is that, while the SATA II spec includes hot-swap capabilities as one of its features, there is no requirement that all features be implemented. With [most] dedicated raid array controllers, hot-swap is a selling point, implemented in both their hardware and their drivers.
Eric Carlson
Veteran Member
After testing 3 oc settings: 1.8GHZ, 2.4GHZ, 3.0GHZ, and until I'm persuaded otherwise, I'm leaving the system at 2.4 (266 x 9).
The driverheaven bench v2 was 115.3 s, 116.2 s, 92.6 s
Tempting to leave the 3.0, but the temps during the v2 test were 39-49, 40-50, and 46-57 -- a noticeable jump for 3.0
For those interested:
Memory timings went 4-4-4-12, 5-5-5-18, 5-7-7-23
CPU V: 1.120-1.232, 1.120-1.216, 1.296-1.328
Also, doing the Intel Thermal Analysis 100% load test, I got temps up to 70°c - beyond the Intel specs of 62 --- leading me to think that I would rather let somebody else test Intel's quality credibility
-)
I don't need to heat my house via computer, so I'm leaving it set at design target of 2.4. CS3 and Bridge load and respond quickly enough for my needs. However, I will say the last jump in performance (3.0) is actually noticeable under CS3 --- just not necessary for me.
John
The driverheaven bench v2 was 115.3 s, 116.2 s, 92.6 s
Tempting to leave the 3.0, but the temps during the v2 test were 39-49, 40-50, and 46-57 -- a noticeable jump for 3.0
For those interested:
Memory timings went 4-4-4-12, 5-5-5-18, 5-7-7-23
CPU V: 1.120-1.232, 1.120-1.216, 1.296-1.328
Also, doing the Intel Thermal Analysis 100% load test, I got temps up to 70°c - beyond the Intel specs of 62 --- leading me to think that I would rather let somebody else test Intel's quality credibility
-)I don't need to heat my house via computer, so I'm leaving it set at design target of 2.4. CS3 and Bridge load and respond quickly enough for my needs. However, I will say the last jump in performance (3.0) is actually noticeable under CS3 --- just not necessary for me.
John
Eric Carlson
Veteran Member
Golf Nut
Well-known member
I have a similar setup that I'm building (not finished building yet):
E6750 CPU
GA-P35-DS3R motherboard
2GB of G.Skill DDR2 800 RAM
Scythe Ninja CPU heat sink
Nexus 120mm fans
Antec P182 case
Fanless GeForce 7600GS 256MB video card
I'm hoping for a cool and quiet 3.0GHz or 3.2GHz overclokc out of this, up from the stock 2.66GHz of the E6750.
How are you cooling your rig? Case fans (number of them and placement), heat sink fan, fan controls, etc.? I believe this motherboard, while it has 4 fan connectors, can only control the CPU fan through the BIOS or SpeedFan. The other 3 connectors get a constant 12V if my information is correct, so the only way to control their speeds is with a hardware controller.
Regards.
--
E6750 CPU
GA-P35-DS3R motherboard
2GB of G.Skill DDR2 800 RAM
Scythe Ninja CPU heat sink
Nexus 120mm fans
Antec P182 case
Fanless GeForce 7600GS 256MB video card
I'm hoping for a cool and quiet 3.0GHz or 3.2GHz overclokc out of this, up from the stock 2.66GHz of the E6750.
How are you cooling your rig? Case fans (number of them and placement), heat sink fan, fan controls, etc.? I believe this motherboard, while it has 4 fan connectors, can only control the CPU fan through the BIOS or SpeedFan. The other 3 connectors get a constant 12V if my information is correct, so the only way to control their speeds is with a hardware controller.
Regards.
--
Antec 182P
Upper chamber fans: 1 rear and 1 top
Lower chamber fan: 1 between HDD cage and power supply
plus Thermaltake CPU fan - yes this is the only one that is controlled via speed control
I just checked this morning - I had left the computer logged on and the Intel Thermal monitor tool on all night (computer at idle) --- highest temp I think was around 38 or 39. After using PS CS3 for about 45 minutes I checked temp log again --- not much increase -- maybe just a couple of degrees.
So, again, I think I'm keeping my settings as described.
Upper chamber fans: 1 rear and 1 top
Lower chamber fan: 1 between HDD cage and power supply
plus Thermaltake CPU fan - yes this is the only one that is controlled via speed control
I just checked this morning - I had left the computer logged on and the Intel Thermal monitor tool on all night (computer at idle) --- highest temp I think was around 38 or 39. After using PS CS3 for about 45 minutes I checked temp log again --- not much increase -- maybe just a couple of degrees.
So, again, I think I'm keeping my settings as described.
Golf Nut
Well-known member
Sounds like a good plan.
I'm gonna try to run without the top case fan in my P182 (block of fthe opening), and run without a fan on the Ninja, and see if my temps are manageable with stock speeds. I am also trying to source a Zalman ZM-MFC2 fan controller so I have hardware control over all my fan speeds, as well as monitoring of temps and power usage.
I'd like to get to a stable and relatively cool 3.2GHz by running a 1:1 FSB/RAM ratio, and upping the FSB of the CPU to 400MHz. Should be relatively straighforward, but may requier a slight bump in the CPU voltage...
--
I started out fiddling with modifying bus speed and voltages - all manually -- the GA P35 mb has a guy named OTTO --- make that "auto" that will do all the voltage adjustments for you -- if you'll simply select the bus speed -- so I ended up just varying from 200 to 266 to 333 --- the examples given in the manual -- yes I read the thing. I'm sure I could have gotten more performance, but as I stated before, all I wanted was to get some really decent PS CS3 performance. The 266 setting seems to be fast enough for me. I'll be interested in what your results are.Sounds like a good plan.
I'm gonna try to run without the top case fan in my P182 (block of
fthe opening), and run without a fan on the Ninja, and see if my
temps are manageable with stock speeds. I am also trying to source a
Zalman ZM-MFC2 fan controller so I have hardware control over all my
fan speeds, as well as monitoring of temps and power usage.
I'd like to get to a stable and relatively cool 3.2GHz by running a
1:1 FSB/RAM ratio, and upping the FSB of the CPU to 400MHz. Should
be relatively straighforward, but may requier a slight bump in the
CPU voltage...
--
John
Lloyd O'Daniel
Forum Enthusiast
I've been reading these threads with great interest, as I am about to build a new box to replace my aging P4 3.06.
My designs sre similar to the config talked about here, except that I will be running Vista...preferably Vista x64. I think I have found V64 drivers for all the devices I have.
Some questions:
1) I assume you would pick the Q6600 (since you did) over the E6850 given the primary use is photo editing. I assume that Vista (64) would utilize the 4 cores for background stuff in addition to multithreaded apps. BTW, I shall NOT overclock!
2) I plan on 4G RAM. I have planned on 2x2GB of Patriot DDR2-800 RAM in the Gigabyte mobo you mentioned. (Current mobo is Gigabyte and has performed well. I've noticed some are using 4x1 instead of 2x2 on some builds, and have seen peripheral comments on problems choosing one or the other. Can you comment on this?
3) My current PATA config is 160 for OS-apps, 160 for non-photo data, 300 for photos. I was thinking that the new box would follow the 160 for OS-apps, 160 cache, 750 for data config OR RAID-0 the 160's for OS-apps and 750 for data. (I do backups and will use the old computer as data redundency, although RAID 1 or 5 might go here.)
My experimentation with Vista 32 has led me to believe that it has much improved memory management than XP. My current machine performs MUCH faster just letting Vista do what it wants with the pagefile rather than when I tried to force it onto the (then empty) second 160. I wonder if Vista really needs the separate pagefile disk as much as XP did. I suppose the PS scratch would still benefit from a 3rd drive. What are your thoughts?
Thanks in advance for any comments or advice...
Lloyd
My designs sre similar to the config talked about here, except that I will be running Vista...preferably Vista x64. I think I have found V64 drivers for all the devices I have.
Some questions:
1) I assume you would pick the Q6600 (since you did) over the E6850 given the primary use is photo editing. I assume that Vista (64) would utilize the 4 cores for background stuff in addition to multithreaded apps. BTW, I shall NOT overclock!
2) I plan on 4G RAM. I have planned on 2x2GB of Patriot DDR2-800 RAM in the Gigabyte mobo you mentioned. (Current mobo is Gigabyte and has performed well. I've noticed some are using 4x1 instead of 2x2 on some builds, and have seen peripheral comments on problems choosing one or the other. Can you comment on this?
3) My current PATA config is 160 for OS-apps, 160 for non-photo data, 300 for photos. I was thinking that the new box would follow the 160 for OS-apps, 160 cache, 750 for data config OR RAID-0 the 160's for OS-apps and 750 for data. (I do backups and will use the old computer as data redundency, although RAID 1 or 5 might go here.)
My experimentation with Vista 32 has led me to believe that it has much improved memory management than XP. My current machine performs MUCH faster just letting Vista do what it wants with the pagefile rather than when I tried to force it onto the (then empty) second 160. I wonder if Vista really needs the separate pagefile disk as much as XP did. I suppose the PS scratch would still benefit from a 3rd drive. What are your thoughts?
Thanks in advance for any comments or advice...
Lloyd
I picked the Q6600 over the E6600 because of price drop -- I did not anticipate any real performance difference based on what I had read -- I had hoped the E6600 would also drop in place about the same time ---- it didn't
Because I did not anticipate going beyond 4GB total RAM, I saw no reason to purchase the more expensive 2GB chips -- with rebates I purchased 4GB of Ballistix for ~ $130 --- it had reasonably good comments -- and so for the price - that's what I got.
I was influenced a great deal by GaySatyr's advice. See the rest of this thread for more detail and final config.
GaySatyr
Senior Member
The quads don't OC as easily as the duo chips do. PhotoShop is not 4-core aware; but some other applications are. Moreover, multitasking is much easier with more cores, even when some of the applications are not quad-core aware.
Cost. Period.
To be honest, except for a few gaming applications (for OS/Apps drive) and except for file compression / decompression and/or rendering video files (for cache drive), RAID-0 is really a waste of time and resources. It really isn't enough faster to justify the expense or the potential trouble. Now if you are talking about 3 (or 4) 150GB Raptors in a single RAID-0 array, that's a horse of a different color.
I haven't figured out all the ins & outs of Vista 32's memory management yet. Overall, it is an improvement; however, it seems to have a number of quirks, some of which I suspect are the fault of 3rd party driver supplies as much as Vista problems. With some kinds of applications running, pagefile size and location seems not to matter at all. With others, specifying pagefile parameters seems to slow things down. With still others, the opposite is true. I suspect as SP1 ships and as vendors get the knack for writing to the new memory model, things will improve considerably.
You might want to experiment with various versions of video drivers. I've found enormous variations in Vista 32 (& 64) resource availability, depending on which version of a driver I've loaded (newer is sometimes but not always better).
Lloyd O'Daniel
Forum Enthusiast
Many thanks to you and llap for a very informative group of threads. I will have to use this build as my test bed for x64. The only 64-bit capable chip I have now is in my notebook. I'll probably try Vista x64 in the new box first. If I run into a wall, I'll drop back to V32.
Interesting comment about video drivers. I'll check that out. I'm currently running an ATI X1300 and it's the first ATI I've had this century. Catalyst had issues with colorimeter software at one point. I deleted it and now am running the driver only. I'm planning on returning to Nvidia with an 8600GTS for the new box.
Interesting comment about video drivers. I'll check that out. I'm currently running an ATI X1300 and it's the first ATI I've had this century. Catalyst had issues with colorimeter software at one point. I deleted it and now am running the driver only. I'm planning on returning to Nvidia with an 8600GTS for the new box.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum