System Configuration

Since we're only looking at one CPU this time, we added and changed the memory options a bit. Last time, we looked at using value RAM vs. performance RAM based on Samsung TCCD memory. OCZ has moved from the old Rev2 Platinum to their new EL Platinum rated to PC-4800 speeds, and the older Rev2 platinum is no longer being manufactured. We're also adding in some results using OCZ VX Gold, Patriot 2x1GB, and we'll try to run some tests using 4x512MB of the OCZ EL Platinum. The VX RAM will be somewhat limited in performance by the maximum 3.2V that the DFI Infinity provides, but it will also serve as a reference point for tighter timings and lower bandwidth in comparison to the PC-4800 RAM.

Along with the more expensive CPU, we felt that it only made sense to upgrade the graphics card, so we're running with a GeForce 7800 GTX - an XFX model with default 450/1200 clock speeds. Note that for games, the results from the Venice processor will basically match the results that we would achieve with the Manchester, so you can refer to the earlier article to see how this system would perform in games with an X800 Pro. The reverse is also true; if you're only running games without any background tasks, the results here (in games) will show how well the Venice setup should perform with a more expensive graphics card. Here's the complete list of components used.

AMD Overclocking System
Hardware Component
Processor Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Manchester 2x512K 2.0GHz (OEM)
Heat Sink/Fan Thermalright XP-90 with generic 92mm 3000 RPM fan
Motherboard DFI nF4 INFINITY
nForce4 AMD 6.70 drivers
Memory Patriot/PDP 2x1024MB ELL 2-3-2-5-1T
OCZ EL Platinum PC4800 2-2-2-5-1T/2.5-4-4-7-1T
OCZ Gold VX 2x512MB 2-2-2-8-1T@3.2V
Generic PC3200 2x512MB 2.5-3-3-8-1T
Video Card XFX 7800 GTX (450/1250 clocks)
ForceWare 81.95 drivers
Hard Drive Seagate SATA 250GB 7200RPM 8MB 7200.8
Optical Drive NEC 3540A
Case Antec Performance II SX635BII (2x80mm Vantec Stealth fans installed)
Power Supply OCZ PowerStream 600W


A complete set of benchmarks for a given configuration requires around 6-8 hours to complete, provided that nothing crashes. Unfortunately, crashes are an all-too-common occurrence when overclocking. A few driver updates (in order to run FEAR optimally) also invalidated earlier results. There are many, many factors that were not fully examined due to time constraints. This is not meant to be a fully comprehensive treatise on overclocking the X2 3800+ or any other processor. Different motherboards are certainly viable - in fact, quite a few motherboards should actually overclock better than the DFI Infinity that was used. This is really intended as a look at performance scaling, as well as some information for those looking to get the best bang for the buck. Building a faster system should be quite easy, but building a system with better performance per dollar (using a dual core processor) will be much more difficult.

I was also contacted by Asetek about testing out their MicroChill and WaterChill cooling solutions. This seemed like an appropriate place to add those to the list of benchmarked configurations, but they really deserve a separate review, so look for that in the very near future. Besides, article bloat and readability can be a problem.

Index Benchmark Information
Comments Locked

46 Comments

View All Comments

  • Puddleglum - Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - link

    Neermind.. read this in the closing thoughts:
    "There is one other point to mention on the memory: overclocking with four 512MB DIMMs was almost a complete failure on the setup that we used. Other motherboards, or perhaps a BIOS update for this motherboard, might improve the results, but for now we would recommend caution with such attempts. If you want to run 2GB of RAM, two 1GB DIMMs would be a much better choice."

    Good info.
  • bobsmith1492 - Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - link

    Actually, switching supply efficiencies can change dramatically with load; I wouldn't count on the draw at the wall as a good indicator of system load change. The efficiency may change from, say 70% at half-load to 85% at 3/4 load, which, on a 400 watt supply, would show up as: 285.7 watts draw (lower power) and 352.9 watts draw (high power). Now, the system is drawing 50% more power, while the meter is only showing 23.5% more power draw.

    Something to keep in mind anyway as I don't know exactly what the difference in efficiency for that particular supply is....
  • Cerb - Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - link

    It would be nice to know. However, if it's like the 470w one, it is 'close enough' at all loads.
    http://www.silentpcreview.com/article173-page4.htm...">http://www.silentpcreview.com/article173-page4.htm...
  • bobsmith1492 - Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - link

    Yeah, from 2-400W it's pretty close. Nevermind me then. :)
  • WRXSTI - Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - link

    I cannot wait to get a 64 X2 chip! Maybe by next year is better...
  • Futurebobis - Thursday, December 1, 2022 - link

    Yo, sup past people

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now