Building new box...ideas on hardware?

stalker · Post by **stalker** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:28 pm

I have a good idea what graphics card I want to get from a previous thread. I was wondering if you all have seen better results from certain processors? There are some cheap quad cores out there for under $300.00. Should I go that route? Does it matter what kind of RAM I get? Any other hardware specifications I should take into account? Any recommendations on brands and models of anything are greatly appreciated. I want to put together a beast of a box for folding.

Post by **toTOW** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:43 pm

A Q6600 with reasonable cooling should go to 3Ghz and more ... so you need a good motherboard for overclocking (I like my Gigabyte P35-DS3R

) and a ram that can support at least DDR2 800. (for example, with default multiplier and a 400 MHz FSB, you reach 3.6 GHz ... but for optimisation you lower the multiplier ... starting at 3.2 GHz, I use a 8 multiplier to have a high FSB).

You also need a correct PSU (a good 500W at least) as quad cores consumption rise fast with fraquency and voltage increases.

7im · Post by **7im** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:44 pm

Asus, Abit, or Gigabyte motherboard with a 775 socket with features as desired (as they all overclock about the same), an Intel Quad (with G0 stepping) fastest you can afford (but the 2.4 GHz model overclocks very well, so no need to buy the top end), 2 GB of the fastest ram you can afford, and an aftermarket HSF from Thermalright. Ultra-90 is sufficient for all but the most extreme overclockers, Ultra-120 if needed. And don't skimp on the Power Supply, make sure it is rated 80Plus efficient, but you don't need a 1000 watter, 400-600w is plenty, depending on your GPU of choice. A 10K SATA drive is nice, but not that big a deal for folding. 7.2 K is sufficient. At least one large quiet case fan. Any recent computer Case is fine, pick one you like. Fill out the rest of the accessories as desired, but they'll have little impact on folding.

If you can wait for a Penryn with a 12 MB cache, you might be rewarded with a very good performer on SMP work units. However, that has yet to be determined and only a guess, and a month or more in the future yet, maybe longer if Intel isn't able to pull them in before the holidays (like they seem to be trying to do).

Post by **toTOW** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:53 pm

Penryn will be bad for overclocking due to 1333 FSB

... or too exepensive (model with big multiplier, or extreme unlocked).

Some numbers about Q6600 overclocking :
- with good aircooling (thermaltake, noctua, ...) : 3.4 GHz (more or less depending on CPU quality and cooling)
- to go higher, you need watercooling and very good PSU : 4 GHz (again, more or less depending on CPU quality and cooling)

7im · Post by **7im** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:17 pm

You might be half right. Penryns will be expensive upon release (as compared to the ultra cheap Quads now), but will come down in price quickly, like usual to keep the pressure on AMD.

However, they WILL overclock well, as this Tom's article seems to indicate, the 3.2 GHz chip hit 4 GHz on early silicon... http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Intel-QX9 ... 749-5.html

stalker · Post by **stalker** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:02 pm

Yeah, that Q6600 is looking like a hell of a deal and has great reviews.

Post by **toTOW** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:23 pm

The main problem for Penryn overclocking is the multiplier : it will be low on most Q9 due to FSB 1333 (instead of 1066 on Q6), so overclocking will be globally more expensive :

- pay more for the CPU to have a high multiplier and save a bit on RAM
- pay less for CPU, but pay more for RAM to support high FSB (4 GHz with 8 multiplier is 500 MHz FSB)

stalker · Post by **stalker** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:32 pm

I've got to be honest here. I'm a bit confused by the "multiplier" talk in here.

ryan · Post by **ryan** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:47 pm

stalker wrote:I've got to be honest here. I'm a bit confused by the "multiplier" talk in here.

Multiplier is how much it multiplies the FSB in order to get your clock speed. For instance my Q6600 is overclocked with a 371Mhz FSB. The Q6600 has a 9x multiplier, so 371x9=3339Mhz, which is my overclocked clock speed. A higher multiplier allows you to overclock more without having to buy faster (more expensive) ram as you want the FSB:DRAM ratio to be 1:1.

With that said, I would say for for the Q6600. It's a great processor and at under $280, it's a steal for what you get. I'm running it with a Thermalright Ultra 120 overclocked to 3.34Ghz. I'm folding withthe SMP client 24/7. The temps never go past 61 degrees (it's always at 100% load) and with the 800rpm Scythe fan on the heatsink, it's silent.

7im · Post by **7im** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:30 pm

toTOW wrote:The main problem for Penryn overclocking is the multiplier : it will be low on most Q9 due to FSB 1333 (instead of 1066 on Q6), so overclocking will be globally more expensive :

- pay more for the CPU to have a high multiplier and save a bit on RAM
- pay less for CPU, but pay more for RAM to support high FSB (4 GHz with 8 multiplier is 500 MHz FSB)

Are you completely forgetting the 12 MB cache. The higher price might be well worth the performance on SMP WUs. We'll have to wait and see.

Some low end Penryns are also coming out at 1066 FSB, so not all are 1333, and those lower end models should cost less and overclock well, just like the low end Conroes did.

Post by **toTOW** » Tue Dec 11, 2007 12:36 am

I'm affraid such CPUs will come with less cache if they exist

I don't forget the extra cache ... it's one of the two thing I like in those CPU :

- 12 MB cache, for better performance at the same clock
- 0.45µ process for better overclocking

Actually, I really like the QX9650 ... tests indicate that it can go up to 4 GHz with air cooling, and the free multiplier allows it to run even with cheap RAM ... but the price is really too high

dschief · Post by **dschief** » Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:42 am

Here's the package that I used to build my farm

3 X C2D 6400
2 X Q6600

Case:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6811119106

M/B
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813121060

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813131225

note: I used to 975XBX2 for the E6400 builds, everything was rock solid stabile from day one,

ANd FC X86_64 booted without a glich

I used the ASUS P5K-E for the 2 Quad builds,
this board has definate bios issues It does not like mixing IDE & SATA drives I could not get Linux to install from the DVD.
I had to put a bare HD into the 975XBX2 box build the Linux system
then transfer the drive to the ASUS box. then run YUM to get all the updates, the set up FAH once up and running FAH runs very smoothly.

Power Supply:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817371001

have this in all 5 boxes

Video: Here I went simple no gameing, Just FAH, Thunderbird & Firefox
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814130052

7up1n3 · Post by **7up1n3** » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:54 am

Without a doubt, quad processors currently offer the best bang/buck for Folding (and general usage IMHO). As above, my recommendation is toward the Q6600, with the X3210 and X3220 also being worthy of a look depending on price. The G0 stepping is highly recommended as they both run cooler and have higher thermal ratings ... just what the overclocking doctor ordered.

As to cooler, I disagree somewhat that a high end cooler is necessary on a G0 stepping quad for a decent overclock. I'd say get the best you can afford, but you can get a lesser cooler, for example a Cooler Master Hyper TX2, and still have very nice temps. I have several of those, usually between free and $10 AR, and am currently running one on my home server's Q6700 @ 3.2GHz / 50C under dual LinSMP (VMware). That said, I would avoid using the OEM cooler even if you're not overclocking.

If you choose to go dual core, make sure it is equipped w/ 4mb cache as makes a huge difference w/ some WUs.

gunderwood · Post by **gunderwood** » Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:22 pm

toTOW wrote:The main problem for Penryn overclocking is the multiplier : it will be low on most Q9 due to FSB 1333 (instead of 1066 on Q6), so overclocking will be globally more expensive :

- pay more for the CPU to have a high multiplier and save a bit on RAM
- pay less for CPU, but pay more for RAM to support high FSB (4 GHz with 8 multiplier is 500 MHz FSB)

Not really. Most of the MB that you would use to get mid 3 Ghz out of a Q6600 are going to cost about the same as what you will need for a Q9450. So it is a RAM question:

DDR2-800 for a Q6600 (9x400): $75 -$25rebate
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820146565

DDR2-1066 for a Q9450 (8x533): $100
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820148069

I used Crucial because they make good RAM and I could find similar stuff quickly. Both are 2x1GB. Notice that if you could actually use the DDR1066 it would be 4.264Ghz vice 3.6Ghz. Not bad for $50! I don't expect a Q9450 to get quite so high, 3.6-4.0Ghz probably; based on QX9650 and G0 results. I have a G0 on air that seems to be Prime95 25.3 stable at 3.7Ghz (9x412, almost done testing, just playing with memory timings).

If you go DDR3, that is a whole different story...

Post by **toTOW** » Tue Dec 11, 2007 11:25 pm

Prime 95 means nothing ... it's too old.

Use Gromacs StressCPU v2 instead

I've found some QX9650 for 960€ (pre tested for 4.4GHz) ... if I hadn't had so much things to buy, I would have taken one right now

Folding Forum

Building new box...ideas on hardware?

Building new box...ideas on hardware?

Shopping list