Best bang for my buck?

I'm looking to get a new processor and I think I know what Im going to get. I wanted to get some feedback to see if I'm making the right decision.

This is primarilly a gaming machine! Mainly I play Warhammer online wich requires a pretty good machine to get the best framrate possible. I have 4 gigs ddr2 memory and a nvidia 8800gt 512mb overclocked addition vid card. My processor is holding me back so I need a new one. I need to keep as far under 200 bucks as possible and I think the E8500 Wolfdale 3.16 Core 2 Duo is my best bet. Seems like I can pretty easily oc it to 3.6. I have a good fan and heatsync.

Now I just want to make sure that getting this process will give me the best performance increase for gaming over a quad core. For the same money it looks like about a 2.6? quad is about the best I can do. And from what I understand I'd get more out of the faster 3.16 duo then I would with the quad?

Any feedback would be appreciated!
Thanks in advance.

We need your system specs, see my sig for an example. We especially need mobo brand and model.

ASUS P5K LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard
Memory 4 gigs dual channel ddr2 800
Nvidia 8800gt superclocked 512mb
I have 2 WD raptors
1 WD 500gb "black" not yet in system
Powersupply I belive is an OCZ GameXstream 800watt. Could be a 700watt I can't remember off hand.
Case Antec 900.

I just want to make sure for around 180.00 I'm getting the best bang for my buck. Like I said it's for Gaming primarily. Do you think I should wait till after the 1st? Will prices drop any time soon and I could get a better processor for around the same price?

what processor are you using as of this moment? at what resolution do you play warhammer?

gciszewski, the reason we're asking all the questions is that there is a relationship between cpu / gpu(s). A cpu can bottleneck a gpu(s) and vice versa. So please answer so we can help you in the best way.

I currently have E6400 2.13GhzIntel Core Duo2, 1066-MHz Front Side Bus, 2.0MB L2 cache.

This was cannabalized out of a system I had at the time so this is the last of those "so-so" parts to upgrade in this box. And let me see, as far as res goes on when playing war I have a 20 inch wide screen dell. I can't remember off hand what res I use but it's the highest it goes. I want to say like 1680 by something? I'm at work right now so I can't look at it.

No problem on all the questions. I appreciate the help.

1680x1050 is a moderate res. not high, but not low either. you should see about overclocking that E6400 to 2.80 GHz or so and leave it there. upgrade your video card if you want more FPS.

an e8500 at 3.1 ghz is not going to radically transform your speed above where it is now. you have a decent CPU.

If your motherboard is willing you should be able to get 3GHz out of the E6400 by raising the fsb to 375MHz and adjusting the memory dividers.

That would be more than enough cpu power for the 8800GT and you don't have to spend anything. Even going to a 333MHz fsb for 2.66GHz would
get you close enough to not being cpu limited.

he probably has the stock intel cooler. early-binned conroes, liked 2.7-2.8 with low volts and they wanted an unreasonable kick to get to the higher freqs. this is just my experience with a couple of B2s from winter 2006. realistically he only needs 2.5 or so. he needs to decide where the system is too slow, and if it's only warhammer, then the CPU is not at all to blame.

Well I did want to use that processor in the other pc that I took it out of. It was just a place holder for the time being. So I do want to get a new cpu for this gaming box anyway. But I want to make sure I'm spending my money wisely. I will probably upgrade the video card I'm hoping this summer or fall. The 8800gt should suffice for now. By then I'm hoping to be able to pick up a 1gig card for fairly cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iamsostupid

he probably has the stock intel cooler. early-binned conroes, liked 2.7-2.8 with low volts and they wanted an unreasonable kick to get to the higher freqs. this is just my experience with a couple of B2s from winter 2006. realistically he only needs 2.5 or so. he needs to decide where the system is too slow, and if it's only warhammer, then the CPU is not at all to blame.

---

I did buy a good heat sync and fan when I built this pc. It's not the stock intel one if that's what you mean.

At any rate I tried bumping my fsb to 375. At boot up it said "overclocking failed. So I went in and bumped it down to 333. It's booted up fine. CPU temps using speed fan went from about 15c to 21c. I havn't messed with the vcores yet. I may go back in later and adjust like the overclocking guide here suggests. This is my first time oc'ing so I have a real newb question. My OS still sees the chip as a 2.13. Is there a way to actually see it display the number it's OC'd to or do you just know in your head that's what the speed your getting out of it? At 333 I"m getting 2.5 out of this chip now?

the chip will always be an E6400 no matter what it operates at, and this is the speed that windows will report in system information or system properties, or what have you.

if you right click on My Computer and hit Properties, or for a hotkey hit Win+Pause, you should see both the 'stock' speed and the overclocked speed. If you don't, then that's weird and I would use a program like CPU-Z to verify you are overclocked.

http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpuz_149.zip

This will tell you the clock multiplier, voltage, and FSB frequency you are currently using, as well as a host of other useful information.

I'm assuming your using the 8x multiplier right now, and if you are, then 8x333 = 2.664 GHz which is fast enough.

Your CPU and motherboard, together, can do more than 375 FSB. The reason your system didn't want to boot is probably memory related. You'll have to look at what options you have to set memory dividers (or ratios, whatever your bios calls them) relative to the FSB, like 1:1 or 3:2 or 5:4 or whatever. Spec your RAM to run at very easy timings and low speeds so that you can find a good spot for your CPU.

Once you get to around 2.8-3.0 GHz, you can then tighten up the RAM. I don't know what kind of memory you have but I would try for around 1000Mhz with 5-5-5-15 timings.

OK thank you.

For some reason windows (vista 32 bit) won't display the correct core speed. But I ran that cpuid program it shows it. I went in and bumped it back up to 375 fsb. I adjusted my ram timings like you said to 5-5-5-15 at 1000mhz. And it's running now at 3gig. I'll leave it hear and test it out. See if it runs stable. I would think it should. I'll monitor the temps and all that.

Thanks for your help and advice. I've been meaning to oc this thing for a while. Just had not taken the time to look into it much. I guess I should look now at lowering the vcore huh? This chip I belive said it was rated at .5-1.5 I think it said. I'll double check. Right now my core voltage is at 1.4

1.4 isn't too high, but try 1.30-1.35. your frequency is certainly high enough to play any game, and i'm sure it's a lot more gratifying than spending $160 on a E8400.

how much faster are your games at 1680x1050?

Well I logged into war and bumping up my processor seemed to make quite a difference! Unfortunately I had to put it back to 2.14 because it became very unstable. The pc Crashed 2 times on me. I had it happen to me when I had the fbs to 333 as well. So I'll wait until I get a new processor to get back to oc'ing.

I planned on getting a new one either way. I have plans for this 2.14 chip in a different box. So im back to my orriginal dilema. Wich chip to buy. I can either get the E8400 or the Q6600. I'm leaning toward the quad. Hopefully I can OC it without the same stability issues I had with the 2.14.

you'll have to look into voltages supplying your FSB signal, memory controller, and memory modules as well and maybe the chip itself needed 1.4 volts.

if all you do is play games don't bother with a quad. get something like a E7200, those are cheap and they can do 3.6-4.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gciszewski

I can either get the E8400 or the Q6600. I'm leaning toward the quad. Hopefully I can OC it without the same stability issues I had with the 2.14.

---

i would get whatever is cheaper, because once you overclock your cpu to 3.0ghz (which E8400 is stock, and the Q6600 can overclock to easy) your video card becomes the bottleneck to the CPU..

check this thread out
http://www.sharkyforums.com/showthread.php?t=314485

i tested 8800GTS with a E6300 and a Q6600... once i got to 3.0ghz on both processors.. they both gave me 213-215 FPS which is less then 1% difference.