Speccing up a new PC, advice please. - Page 4

semi-pro waster · 05-03-2007, 20:47

The Raptors, particularly the 36gb versions aren't that much quicker than the Seagate 7200.10s and tend to cost at least twice the price for half the storage. If you want to do so then by all means go for it but I don't think it is a valuable use of funds. I'd still switch to the 6600 (2.4ghz chip) anyway though and save the cash, if you want to overclock then with PC6400 Ram you should be able to get to 3.6ghz (assuming a good clocking chip and adequate cooling) due to the 9x multiplier, 3.2ghz is a more realistic target however but that is still far in advance of the 6700 at stock.

Stan_Lite · 05-03-2007, 21:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by semi-pro waster

I'd still switch to the 6600 (2.4ghz chip) anyway though and save the cash, if you want to overclock then with PC6400 Ram you should be able to get to 3.6ghz (assuming a good clocking chip and adequate cooling) due to the 9x multiplier, 3.2ghz is a more realistic target however but that is still far in advance of the 6700 at stock.

Mine does 3.2 at stock volts with hardly a twitch in temperature. It will do 3.6 with naughty volts but I wouldn't dream of Folding 24/7 at that.

Even if you're not comfortable overclocking it, the E6600 is blisteringly fast at stock speed.

Stan

Dr. Z · 05-03-2007, 21:39

They are that fast? Christ!!

Mark · 05-03-2007, 23:38

Yup, they are.

If I can convince myself to give clocking a go, I might. The trouble is I know precisely nothing about the subject and I treat BIOS settings with extreme caution. I can't afford to have a broken system.

The other bit that makes me reluctant is that I also have no hardware monitoring bar the BIOS (which isn't much use if you want to load test) as the Linux kernel guys are only just adding thermal monitoring support for C2D chips now and I can't use the latest kernels anyway due to broken drivers.

Zirax · 06-03-2007, 12:28

I'm still toying with raid 0, however after seeing the sustained read speeds that some of the guys on ocuk forums have been getting... I think I will go raid 0.

The WD AACS seem to be the daddy's however I wouldn't want 2*500gb in a raid 0. Of particular interest should be post #7
http://forums.ove*************.uk/sh...php?t=17696862

Even with bargain basement 40gb drives, just look at the sustained read!! I would look at the 200gb 7200.10 drives that nearly match the raptor performance for a lot less and then stuff them in a raid 0.

The main reason is 74gb isn't much to play with nower days but the main difference is if you play games & want the access times

Mark · 06-03-2007, 12:30

I've long since decided RAID 0 isn't for me. I use real honest to goodness RAID 1 in the server box (though I suspect fakeraid would be faster now).

Zirax · 06-03-2007, 12:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark

I've long since decided RAID 0 isn't for me. I use real honest to goodness RAID 1 in the server box (though I suspect fakeraid would be faster now).

I have 3* raid 1 partitions at the moment in different boxes. Raid 1 is meant to have redundancy but speed up the read speed at the same time.... does it hell. I will probably have the OS&games installed on a raid 0, backup up onto a raid 1 partition when I upgrade.

Daz · 06-03-2007, 12:43

RAID-1's just an availability solution, doesn't really give any other benefits. If that's what you need then great, but most people just need a backup solution.

semi-pro waster · 06-03-2007, 17:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zirax

I have 3* raid 1 partitions at the moment in different boxes. Raid 1 is meant to have redundancy but speed up the read speed at the same time.... does it hell. I will probably have the OS&games installed on a raid 0, backup up onto a raid 1 partition when I upgrade.

At first I thought it didn't do anything to speed up the system then I heard that it improved read speeds, apparantly it is only on some Raid controllers that it might as in theory at least it could, rpstewart over there who knows shedloads about such things doesn't know of any that do improve read speeds though. All of which mean I'm now back to my original position of saying that it has no impact.

Feek · 06-03-2007, 17:53

I've pretty much made a final decision now.

Which is everything I originally listed, but with the 6600 CPU instead of the 6700, with a 2Gb USB key to use with ReadyBoost and a copy of Vista Home Premium x64.

05-03-2007, 20:47	#31
semi-pro waster Provider of sensible advice about homosexuals Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: London Posts: 2,615	The Raptors, particularly the 36gb versions aren't that much quicker than the Seagate 7200.10s and tend to cost at least twice the price for half the storage. If you want to do so then by all means go for it but I don't think it is a valuable use of funds. I'd still switch to the 6600 (2.4ghz chip) anyway though and save the cash, if you want to overclock then with PC6400 Ram you should be able to get to 3.6ghz (assuming a good clocking chip and adequate cooling) due to the 9x multiplier, 3.2ghz is a more realistic target however but that is still far in advance of the 6700 at stock. __________________ "Your friend is the man that knows all about you, and still likes you." - Elbert Hubbard

05-03-2007, 21:39	#33
Dr. Z I'm going for a scuttle... Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,021	They are that fast? Christ!! __________________

06-03-2007, 12:43	#38
Daz The Stig Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Swad! Posts: 10,713	RAID-1's just an availability solution, doesn't really give any other benefits. If that's what you need then great, but most people just need a backup solution. __________________ apt-get moo

06-03-2007, 17:53	#40
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	I've pretty much made a final decision now. Which is everything I originally listed, but with the 6600 CPU instead of the 6700, with a 2Gb USB key to use with ReadyBoost and a copy of Vista Home Premium x64. __________________ Last edited by Feek; 06-03-2007 at 17:57.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-03-2007, 23:38	#34
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Yup, they are. If I can convince myself to give clocking a go, I might. The trouble is I know precisely nothing about the subject and I treat BIOS settings with extreme caution. I can't afford to have a broken system. The other bit that makes me reluctant is that I also have no hardware monitoring bar the BIOS (which isn't much use if you want to load test) as the Linux kernel guys are only just adding thermal monitoring support for C2D chips now and I can't use the latest kernels anyway due to broken drivers.

06-03-2007, 12:28	#35
Zirax Goes up to 11! Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,577	I'm still toying with raid 0, however after seeing the sustained read speeds that some of the guys on ocuk forums have been getting... I think I will go raid 0. The WD AACS seem to be the daddy's however I wouldn't want 2500gb in a raid 0. Of particular interest should be post #7 http://forums.ove************.uk/sh...php?t=17696862 Even with bargain basement 40gb drives, just look at the sustained read!! I would look at the 200gb 7200.10 drives that nearly match the raptor performance for a lot less and then stuff them in a raid 0. The main reason is 74gb isn't much to play with nower days but the main difference is if you play games & want the access times

06-03-2007, 12:30	#36
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	I've long since decided RAID 0 isn't for me. I use real honest to goodness RAID 1 in the server box (though I suspect fakeraid would be faster now).