Does Tom's hardware apply the heatsink paste material correctly ???

P.S.:

The last part of the video says it all:

Pentium 840 EE faster for multiple applications.

Right now I have 14 applications open and this is only a light load:

1 Msn messenger and 1 MSN chat window
1 Acrobat reader
3 Windows explorers
1 Textpad
3 Internet Explorers
1 Winzip
1 Media Player
1 Microsoft outlook express
1 Microsoft Anti Spy ware (had to do a scan)
1 Zone Alarm Pro firewall

I am not even developing software... no development environments open, I am
not even downloading with internet explorer or bittorrent.

I am not even playing music.

So who the **** cares if AMD **** is faster for a single application.

GET REAL =D hehehe

I still think Extreme Edition should be and probably is the better choice

Looking forward to more performance for multiple applications... though thx
to my windows xp speed up tips the current performance is not bad at all.
The only thing which is sloowww is lot's of internet explorers with lot's of
mediaflash bull****.

Bye,
Skybuck.

Wieeeeeeee.

"Skybuck Flying" wrote in message news:...
Hi,

Take a look at this video and tell me what you think:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2005...sstest-02.html

Is the heatsink/cpu paste/material applied correctly ?

Occording to the gigabyte motherboard manual I would say no.

This guy simply puts a drop on the cpu/heatsink ? (Maybe that s why it
burned through)

Why doesn't he smear it out like one is supposed to do ?

Risky bussiness

I would smear it out just in case

Right now I am reading a gigabyte motherboard manual, and I must say that
this manual is much more professional and more details than the asus's
motherboard manual ! :P (though the gigabyte is an intel cpu/motherboard
manual and the asus was an amd cpu/motherboard manual but still.)

Bye,
Skybuck.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:22:32 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:

P.S.:

The last part of the video says it all:

Pentium 840 EE faster for multiple applications.

Right now I have 14 applications open and this is only a light load:

1 Msn messenger and 1 MSN chat window
1 Acrobat reader
3 Windows explorers
1 Textpad
3 Internet Explorers
1 Winzip
1 Media Player
1 Microsoft outlook express
1 Microsoft Anti Spy ware (had to do a scan)
1 Zone Alarm Pro firewall

I am not even developing software... no development environments open, I am
not even downloading with internet explorer or bittorrent.

I am not even playing music.

So who the **** cares if AMD **** is faster for a single application.


Actually AMD X2 4800+ is overall faster for multiple apps. Tom's
Hardware is an Intel mouthpiece. The Windows task manager actually
allocated far more time to the DiVx app on the E840, because it saw
what it thought was 4 processor cores in the Extreme 840 -- and for
reasons best known to itself, this specific app and the mix the
other apps in the group selected. Eliminate the Divx app and you
would find that the AMD system was by far the fastest overall.The
final report from Tom's Hardware glossed over all this. Two element
worthy of note:-

(1) the AMD system did not crash once through the whole test sequence;
the Intel required 6 board changes.

(2) The Extreme 840 ran at 68 degrees core temp ( 1.8 degrees below
its recommended max ( see processorfinder.intel.com ), with the
correct manufacturer-supplied heat-sink. The X2 4800+ ran at 60
degrees max. Just a few more degrees of extra ambient warming
and the 840 would silicon-protect itself by internally
auto-throttling without any user-notification whatsoever.

Me, I like to build reliable computers - dunno about you. And
self-generated heat is the greatest potential source of flakiness and
unreliability, both short and long-term - not only to the devices that
are getting exceptionally hot, but also to adjacent key components
such as video cards, and of course to any motherboard
power-regulators.

So, I do hope if you invest in a Pentium-D or Extreme-840
system that you pay very careful attention to both the +12V
power-supply requirements and the cooling of all key components,
particularly the MB power-requlators which are normally in the
wind-shadow of the CPU heatsink.

John Lewis

- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:22:32 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:

P.S.:

The last part of the video says it all:

Pentium 840 EE faster for multiple applications.

Right now I have 14 applications open and this is only a light load:

1 Msn messenger and 1 MSN chat window
1 Acrobat reader
3 Windows explorers
1 Textpad
3 Internet Explorers
1 Winzip
1 Media Player
1 Microsoft outlook express
1 Microsoft Anti Spy ware (had to do a scan)
1 Zone Alarm Pro firewall

I am not even developing software... no development environments open, I
am
not even downloading with internet explorer or bittorrent.

I am not even playing music.

So who the **** cares if AMD **** is faster for a single application.


Actually AMD X2 4800+ is overall faster for multiple apps. Tom's
Hardware is an Intel mouthpiece. The Windows task manager actually
allocated far more time to the DiVx app on the E840, because it saw
what it thought was 4 processor cores in the Extreme 840 -- and for
reasons best known to itself, this specific app and the mix the
other apps in the group selected. Eliminate the Divx app and you
would find that the AMD system was by far the fastest overall.The
final report from Tom's Hardware glossed over all this. Two element
worthy of note:-

(1) the AMD system did not crash once through the whole test sequence;
the Intel required 6 board changes.

(2) The Extreme 840 ran at 68 degrees core temp ( 1.8 degrees below
its recommended max ( see processorfinder.intel.com ), with the
correct manufacturer-supplied heat-sink. The X2 4800+ ran at 60
degrees max. Just a few more degrees of extra ambient warming
and the 840 would silicon-protect itself by internally
auto-throttling without any user-notification whatsoever.

Me, I like to build reliable computers - dunno about you. And
self-generated heat is the greatest potential source of flakiness and
unreliability, both short and long-term - not only to the devices that
are getting exceptionally hot, but also to adjacent key components
such as video cards, and of course to any motherboard
power-regulators.

Intel's nforce 4 sli chipset has problems.

Asus motherboards have problems.

However other intel chipsets (intel's own chipset) will probably work much
better with intel cpu's etc.

So I am thinking about building a intel only system... an Intel CPU and an
Intel chipset... instead of an nvidia chipset.

Besides SLI is way too expensive to buy two video cards...

I am also thinking about buying an gigabyte motherboard... so far their
manuals are excellent.

Seeing the dual bios fail is bad though.


So, I do hope if you invest in a Pentium-D or Extreme-840
system that you pay very careful attention to both the +12V
power-supply requirements and the cooling of all key components,
particularly the MB power-requlators which are normally in the
wind-shadow of the CPU heatsink.

Bye,
Skybuck.

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:22:32 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:

P.S.:

The last part of the video says it all:

Pentium 840 EE faster for multiple applications.

Right now I have 14 applications open and this is only a light load:

1 Msn messenger and 1 MSN chat window
1 Acrobat reader
3 Windows explorers
1 Textpad
3 Internet Explorers
1 Winzip
1 Media Player
1 Microsoft outlook express
1 Microsoft Anti Spy ware (had to do a scan)
1 Zone Alarm Pro firewall

I am not even developing software... no development environments open, I
am
not even downloading with internet explorer or bittorrent.

I am not even playing music.

So who the **** cares if AMD **** is faster for a single application.


Actually AMD X2 4800+ is overall faster for multiple apps. Tom's
Hardware is an Intel mouthpiece. The Windows task manager actually
allocated far more time to the DiVx app on the E840, because it saw
what it thought was 4 processor cores in the Extreme 840 -- and for
reasons best known to itself, this specific app and the mix the
other apps in the group selected. Eliminate the Divx app and you
would find that the AMD system was by far the fastest overall.The
final report from Tom's Hardware glossed over all this. Two element
worthy of note:-

The intel pentium 4 extreme edition sounds very cool.

Having 4 cores which could in theory execute 4 threads at the same time is a
programmer's dream.

If windows is smart enough to assign time to threads who really need it
that's just smart.

I look forward to giving it a test drive with my own multi threaded test
programs etc =D

Bye,
Skybuck.

"Skybuck Flying" wrote in message
...
P.S.:

The last part of the video says it all:

Pentium 840 EE faster for multiple applications.

Right now I have 14 applications open and this is only a light load:

1 Msn messenger and 1 MSN chat window
1 Acrobat reader
3 Windows explorers
1 Textpad
3 Internet Explorers
1 Winzip
1 Media Player
1 Microsoft outlook express
1 Microsoft Anti Spy ware (had to do a scan)
1 Zone Alarm Pro firewall

I am not even developing software... no development environments open, I
am
not even downloading with internet explorer or bittorrent.

I am not even playing music.

So who the **** cares if AMD **** is faster for a single application.
Actually, you are probably only running one application...
This is a common thing with MS, that you have a lot of applications
loaded, but only the one with the 'context' (active at the front of the
screen), is actually doing anything.
Windows for many people, is a 'task switching' OS, rather than a
'multi-tasking' OS. Having a lot of applications 'running', requires you
to be using applications that carry on performing jobs, while you are not
looking at them.

Best Wishes

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 20:04:37 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:


"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:22:32 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:

P.S.:

The last part of the video says it all:

Pentium 840 EE faster for multiple applications.

Right now I have 14 applications open and this is only a light load:

1 Msn messenger and 1 MSN chat window
1 Acrobat reader
3 Windows explorers
1 Textpad
3 Internet Explorers
1 Winzip
1 Media Player
1 Microsoft outlook express
1 Microsoft Anti Spy ware (had to do a scan)
1 Zone Alarm Pro firewall

I am not even developing software... no development environments open, I
am
not even downloading with internet explorer or bittorrent.

I am not even playing music.

So who the **** cares if AMD **** is faster for a single application.


Actually AMD X2 4800+ is overall faster for multiple apps. Tom's
Hardware is an Intel mouthpiece. The Windows task manager actually
allocated far more time to the DiVx app on the E840, because it saw
what it thought was 4 processor cores in the Extreme 840 -- and for
reasons best known to itself, this specific app and the mix the
other apps in the group selected. Eliminate the Divx app and you
would find that the AMD system was by far the fastest overall.The
final report from Tom's Hardware glossed over all this. Two element
worthy of note:-

The intel pentium 4 extreme edition sounds very cool.

Having 4 cores which could in theory execute 4 threads at the same time is a
programmer's dream.

If windows is smart enough to assign time to threads who really need it
that's just smart.

I look forward to giving it a test drive with my own multi threaded test
programs etc =D

Bye,
Skybuck.


Extreme 840- 2 cores with full resources and 2 cores with minimal
resources. I use a P4 3.2 for video editing and mpeg encoding.
Enabling HT only increases encoding performance by 20%. So, if you
consider the stand-alone Divx performance of the 840 and X2 4800+ in
Tom's tests ( with 840 HT turned off -- unfortunately they did not do
it with HT turned on ) and add about 40 %, you will bring the 840
close to the performance of the X2 4800+ ...... at 100watts of extra
power, 75 for the processor, 25 for the Northbridge.

Not exactly my idea of the efficient ( or reliable) use of compute
resources.

Also don't forget the new motherboard and DDR2 memory.
Pentium-D and Extreme 840 do not retrofit in current LGA775
motherboards - terrific advance-planning ( many say deliberate -
to sell new chipsets and motherboards) by Intel. So all those
who have recently purchased 915 and 925 chip-set
boards are screwed...

Those fortunate enough to possess a Socket-939 motherboard
may just have to upgrade their BIOS to be compatible with AMD X2.

I have only built and used Intel systems up to now. The technical
and user reasons for going with AMD X2 next time around
are overwhelming. I shall be building a new system somewhere
in the September-October timeframe - no doubt there will be a rich
choice of motherboard and peripheral combinations at that time and
dual-core processor prices will have slid quite a bit.

John Lewis

- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 20:04:37 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:


"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:22:32 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:

P.S.:

The last part of the video says it all:

Pentium 840 EE faster for multiple applications.

Right now I have 14 applications open and this is only a light load:

1 Msn messenger and 1 MSN chat window
1 Acrobat reader
3 Windows explorers
1 Textpad
3 Internet Explorers
1 Winzip
1 Media Player
1 Microsoft outlook express
1 Microsoft Anti Spy ware (had to do a scan)
1 Zone Alarm Pro firewall

I am not even developing software... no development environments open,
I
am
not even downloading with internet explorer or bittorrent.

I am not even playing music.

So who the **** cares if AMD **** is faster for a single application.


Actually AMD X2 4800+ is overall faster for multiple apps. Tom's
Hardware is an Intel mouthpiece. The Windows task manager actually
allocated far more time to the DiVx app on the E840, because it saw
what it thought was 4 processor cores in the Extreme 840 -- and for
reasons best known to itself, this specific app and the mix the
other apps in the group selected. Eliminate the Divx app and you
would find that the AMD system was by far the fastest overall.The
final report from Tom's Hardware glossed over all this. Two element
worthy of note:-

The intel pentium 4 extreme edition sounds very cool.

Having 4 cores which could in theory execute 4 threads at the same time
is a
programmer's dream.

If windows is smart enough to assign time to threads who really need it
that's just smart.

I look forward to giving it a test drive with my own multi threaded test
programs etc =D

Bye,
Skybuck.


Extreme 840- 2 cores with full resources and 2 cores with minimal
resources. I use a P4 3.2 for video editing and mpeg encoding.
Enabling HT only increases encoding performance by 20%. So, if you
consider the stand-alone Divx performance of the 840 and X2 4800+ in
Tom's tests ( with 840 HT turned off -- unfortunately they did not do
it with HT turned on ) and add about 40 %, you will bring the 840
close to the performance of the X2 4800+ ...... at 100watts of extra
power, 75 for the processor, 25 for the Northbridge.

Not exactly my idea of the efficient ( or reliable) use of compute
resources.

Also don't forget the new motherboard and DDR2 memory.
Pentium-D and Extreme 840 do not retrofit in current LGA775
motherboards - terrific advance-planning ( many say deliberate -
to sell new chipsets and motherboards) by Intel. So all those
who have recently purchased 915 and 925 chip-set
boards are screwed...

What you talking about ?

I will buy everything new so big deal.


Those fortunate enough to possess a Socket-939 motherboard
may just have to upgrade their BIOS to be compatible with AMD X2.

I have only built and used Intel systems up to now. The technical
and user reasons for going with AMD X2 next time around
are overwhelming. I shall be building a new system somewhere
in the September-October timeframe - no doubt there will be a rich
choice of motherboard and peripheral combinations at that time and
dual-core processor prices will have slid quite a bit.

John Lewis

- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:47:07 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:


The intel pentium 4 extreme edition sounds very cool.

Having 4 cores which could in theory execute 4 threads at the same time
is a
programmer's dream.

If windows is smart enough to assign time to threads who really need it
that's just smart.

I look forward to giving it a test drive with my own multi threaded test
programs etc =D

Bye,
Skybuck.


Extreme 840- 2 cores with full resources and 2 cores with minimal
resources. I use a P4 3.2 for video editing and mpeg encoding.
Enabling HT only increases encoding performance by 20%. So, if you
consider the stand-alone Divx performance of the 840 and X2 4800+ in
Tom's tests ( with 840 HT turned off -- unfortunately they did not do
it with HT turned on ) and add about 40 %, you will bring the 840
close to the performance of the X2 4800+ ...... at 100watts of extra
power, 75 for the processor, 25 for the Northbridge.

Not exactly my idea of the efficient ( or reliable) use of compute
resources.

Also don't forget the new motherboard and DDR2 memory.
Pentium-D and Extreme 840 do not retrofit in current LGA775
motherboards - terrific advance-planning ( many say deliberate -
to sell new chipsets and motherboards) by Intel. So all those
who have recently purchased 915 and 925 chip-set
boards are screwed...

What you talking about ?

I will buy everything new so big deal.


Hopefully you live in a cool climate. You will have an expensive
foot-warmer under your desk.

John Lewis

- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.

In article , "Skybuck
Flying" wrote:
The intel pentium 4 extreme edition sounds very cool.

Having 4 cores which could in theory execute 4 threads at the same
time is a
programmer's dream.
The latest number of the german famous computer magazin "c't", the
Pentium Extreme Edition was compared with the Pentium D and the AMD X2
processors. The result was clear: Intel has nothing in their sales
shop to beat AMD.
And, what is much more important: The benefit of the HT of the EE
compared to the Pentium D is only the higher "coolness factor".
And, but this is also well known: The AMD has a much lower energy
consumption and becomes less warm then the Intel heating devices.
Therefore, the AMD X2 is the best choice to build a 2-16 core system.
Moritz

--

"John Lewis" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:47:07 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
wrote:


The intel pentium 4 extreme edition sounds very cool.

Having 4 cores which could in theory execute 4 threads at the same
time
is a
programmer's dream.

If windows is smart enough to assign time to threads who really need
it
that's just smart.

I look forward to giving it a test drive with my own multi threaded
test
programs etc =D

Bye,
Skybuck.


Extreme 840- 2 cores with full resources and 2 cores with minimal
resources. I use a P4 3.2 for video editing and mpeg encoding.
Enabling HT only increases encoding performance by 20%. So, if you
consider the stand-alone Divx performance of the 840 and X2 4800+ in
Tom's tests ( with 840 HT turned off -- unfortunately they did not do
it with HT turned on ) and add about 40 %, you will bring the 840
close to the performance of the X2 4800+ ...... at 100watts of extra
power, 75 for the processor, 25 for the Northbridge.

Not exactly my idea of the efficient ( or reliable) use of compute
resources.

Also don't forget the new motherboard and DDR2 memory.
Pentium-D and Extreme 840 do not retrofit in current LGA775
motherboards - terrific advance-planning ( many say deliberate -
to sell new chipsets and motherboards) by Intel. So all those
who have recently purchased 915 and 925 chip-set
boards are screwed...

What you talking about ?

I will buy everything new so big deal.


Hopefully you live in a cool climate. You will have an expensive
foot-warmer under your desk.

John Lewis

Lol, I find this heat argument funny.

My parents have a AMD 2600+ XP processor and a RADEON 9000 card. In a medium
tower in a small room.

After a few hours the room gets damn hot.

So this heat argument is irrelevant. All processors and graphics cards
produce enough heat to warm up any room

Bye,
Skybuck.