CPU speed vs RAM question

FineProperty

New Member
First post, don't haze me too bad.

I've been reading a lot of great info here, thanks!

I'm looking to toss about $3500 at a new machine. :D I've picked out the QX9650, unless I procrastinate to the QX9770 which I think is just intels overclocked version of the same chip. I've been told that I can overclock the 9650 only if I run the Crucial 1600mhz RAM, and Crucial only warranties 2GB. I'm in an office environment, running to monitors and a half dozen apps at a time...I'm pretty certain I want 4GB of DDR3 ram.

If I do that amount of RAM, it would have to be the 1333, and they tell me not to overclock the CPU with that RAM. I would be using the ASUS p5e deluxe with wifi for the DDR3 and no overclocking. And an Nvidia board with the DDR2 Crucial and overclocked 9650.

No insult here, but I've also looked at the Xeon's running in the Mac Pro for the same money. But I'd feel like I was using two computers because I'd need windows for specific work programs and games, plus the Mac side for daily living.

It's like two posts in one...any insight would be great.
 
Why 4GB of ram a 32bit OS can only use 2GB per application. I would buy the fastest pair of 1GB sticks.
 
My understanding is that Vista will see 3 -3.5 Gb of RAM...some also state they see 4. I just haven't seen any testing to compare speed of 2Gb vs 4Gb installed. I've read that Vista machines with 4Gb are using 1.2Gb just running the OS. Vista probably sees there's 4 and uses what's out there.
 
My understanding is that Vista will see 3 -3.5 Gb of RAM...some also state they see 4. I just haven't seen any testing to compare speed of 2Gb vs 4Gb installed. I've read that Vista machines with 4Gb are using 1.2Gb just running the OS. Vista probably sees there's 4 and uses what's out there.
Technically Windows 32 bit can support 4GB of RAM, however once you deduct the memory from the rest of your components, the total usable system RAM is usually only around 3-3.25GB.
 
I think I've talked myself off the ledge of overspending then. I could do an overclocked E6850 at 3.3ghz, and do 2gb of corsairs running 1600mhz and get the same performance as a non overclocked qx9650 running 4gb of DDR3.

Eventually, hopefully, software will be written to use the full potential of quad cores.
 
Who told you that you could only OC the QX9650 with certain RAM? I think that is dependent on the MB.

And I would say go with QX9650 and cheaper DDR2 RAM, rather than the other way around. And get an MB that just does the job, like the P35 gigabyte boards or something - then upgrade to DDR3 when it is financially viable.

Point being - skimp on the RAM not the processor - the QX9650 will get 4.00GHz+ very, very easily.
 
I think I've talked myself off the ledge of overspending then. I could do an overclocked E6850 at 3.3ghz, and do 2gb of corsairs running 1600mhz and get the same performance as a non overclocked qx9650 running 4gb of DDR3.

Eventually, hopefully, software will be written to use the full potential of quad cores.
That is not true at all. First, the E6850 is a dual-core, so no matter how high you overclock it you can't make it better/faster then the quad-core QX9650 (which also uses 45nm tech and more L2 cache). Also, getting RAM which runs at 1600MHz is pointless and a waste of money.
 
And 1600 MHz RAM is absolutely not necessary for OCing the QX9650 like you stated.

Pretty much everyone who gets this processor will end up doing most of the OC with the multiplier, not the FSB... at least that has been my experience.

Your MB will run into its OC roof long before that CPU does.
 
I'd start water cooled at 3.3 and work my way up. I need reliability with the speed, it's not a one year cpu, I'd like to get two years at least.

As for the 780i, you have to do the upgrade for the 45nm chips to work.
 
As for the 780i, you have to do the upgrade for the 45nm chips to work.

No you don't... I can run a QX9650 on my $75 P31-DS3L... and it would work fine...

The P31, P35, and X38 series support the 45nm, varying from roughly $60-$300...
 
BTW, Windows Vista 64bit preium and up all support 16gigs plus (off of microsoft's website)

But as far as 32bit I had to go and guy 64bit because when I installed my 4 gigs it only reg'd as having 2.85 so when I upgraded to 64bit it gave me my 4gigs
 
Back
Top