| Intel Quad-Core Test Settings | ||
|---|---|---|
| Default Settings | Overclock Settings |
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 | 2.69 GHz, (7x 384 MHz) 1.29V core, 1.40V FSB |
| RAM | DDR3-1333 CAS 9-9-9-24, 1.50V | DDR3-1536 CAS 6-6-5-16, 1.65V |
| Motherboard | MSI P45 Diamond LGA-1366, P45/ICH10R, BIOS 1.5 (10/10/2009) | |
| Graphics | Zotac GeForce GTX260² | |
| Hard Drive | Western Digital VelociRaptor WD30000HLFS | |
| Sound | Integrated HD Audio | |
| Networking | Integrated Gigabit LAN | |
Software | ||
| Operating System | Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate x64 SP1 | |
| Graphics | GeForce 182.08 Desktop | |
A stock FSB clock that was already near the processor’s limit made this the most disappointing overclocking experience we can remember since National Semiconductor’s Cyrix MII. Its measly 15% gain felt like a tremendous achievement, however, considering the great effort required to reach a 2.69 GHz clock frequency.
Sandra Arithmetic and Multimedia show CPU performance gains of 14 to 15 percent.
A memory bandwidth increase of 19% looks much better, but isn’t as noteworthy in a CPU overclocking guide.
Low core voltage plus high FSB voltage brings a significant penalty in power consumption, even though performance gains were mediocre at best.
An efficiency loss of 9% results from a ratio of performance to power consumption for the overclocked configuration.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment