I had a very similar build back then, ultimately I was disappointed with the 4850 and ended up swapping for a GTX260. That was probably personal preference with the games I personally enjoy tho.

I think I ran my Q6600 at 3.8ghz, IMO I’d always take the quad core over a slightly faster dual core.

Very nice looking machine with the black, red and gold/yellow colour theme.

My experience with XP on multicore and even multiple CPU computers is fine.
XP itself won't have any problems, and most games I suspect simply ignore the second core.
I don't have any but apparently some games require you to assign to a core which can be done using one of the methods listed here
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/f … 04-aa384dc91707

For gaming especially this era not much is going to use more than a single core so faster is better than more, but that's boring and typically go for quad just because I can, dropping back to a dual core is only going to give you a few extra fps.

All my XP rigs have 4GB RAM and this causes no issues at all.

Personally I don't see the point in overclocking old hardware. As you said you can just go out and buy faster hardware but then none of my builds are period correct.

Looks good!

I'm going to say what I said on another forum recently: "Overclocking in 2025 is pointless. Modern hardware is already so powerful and produces a lot of heat as it is! For retro machines it doesn't make sense either as longevity is now generally desired, more than a few extra FPS."

Personally i'd get the 4GB you may not be able to utilize it 100%, but thats still on average an extra 1.5GB of RAM.

BinaryDemon wrote on 2025-02-11, 22:05:

I had a very similar build back then, ultimately I was disappointed with the 4850 and ended up swapping for a GTX260. That was probably personal preference with the games I personally enjoy tho.

I think I ran my Q6600 at 3.8ghz, IMO I’d always take the quad core over a slightly faster dual core.

Yeah, I've read those CPUs were pretty extreme overclockers, if you had adeguate cooling on both the CPU and MOBO.
The AMD driver isn't very enticing, to be honest. The GPU is recognized as a generic "4800 series", and catayst tells me it has 1024mb or VRAM (??). HWinfo and GPU-Z both shows the card correctly, as a 4850 with 512mb. Add to that the artifacts when I remove that support and let it sag (wich should be an easy fix from a lab), I was really thinking in upgrading it to a low powered 60 series card from nVidia, not more than a 560ti, wich I think is alredy overkill.

And it doens't perform spectacularly either, it's just good: I tested the first Assassin's Creed and COD 4, and both struggle to keep stable 60 at 1280*1024 and 1024*768 respectively. They have pretty huge spikes and, especially in COD at 1024x768, where I can fully use the 85hz of my CRT, it's a bit jarring to go from 85fps to less than 60. It may be a CPU bottleneck, since that quad core doens't clock as high as I would like, but if you think a quad core is always preferable in a similar situation, I'll look for a Q9650 rather than a E8600. Even Crazy Taxi (the old port that ran slower at 50FPS cap), has one istance where it drops frames: When I jump off the street at "Cable Car stop TOP" Maybe it doens't like to show all the city downhill with cars and stuff?

chinny22 wrote on 2025-02-12, 03:26:

Very nice looking machine with the black, red and gold/yellow colour theme. […]
Show full quote

Very nice looking machine with the black, red and gold/yellow colour theme.

My experience with XP on multicore and even multiple CPU computers is fine.
XP itself won't have any problems, and most games I suspect simply ignore the second core.
I don't have any but apparently some games require you to assign to a core which can be done using one of the methods listed here
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/f … 04-aa384dc91707

For gaming especially this era not much is going to use more than a single core so faster is better than more, but that's boring and typically go for quad just because I can, dropping back to a dual core is only going to give you a few extra fps.

All my XP rigs have 4GB RAM and this causes no issues at all.

Personally I don't see the point in overclocking old hardware. As you said you can just go out and buy faster hardware but then none of my builds are period correct.

Yup, the MOBO does look good, I think it was made to be a showpiece.
My doubt about the cores is, as far as I can remember from back then, it's that games liked higher clocked single cores than multiple ones clocked lower, and the Core2Duo used to clock slightly faster than the 4 cores (the E8600 clocks 3.33 stock, while the 9650 3.0). So, since I will use this build mostly for games, and the price is not that different, I was wondering what would be more worth to get: An E8600 or a Q9650. Or simply stay with the stock Q6600.

I'll talk about the RAM and OC under the next quote

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-12, 08:22:

Looks good!

I'm going to say what I said on another forum recently: "Overclocking in 2025 is pointless. Modern hardware is already so powerful and produces a lot of heat as it is! For retro machines it doesn't make sense either as longevity is now generally desired, more than a few extra FPS."

Personally i'd get the 4GB you may not be able to utilize it 100%, but thats still on average an extra 1.5GB of RAM.

The 4 GB RAM wasn't a doubt about "does it work on XP", but more something "is it worth for 2008/2009 XP". I currently have 4GB on four sticks (it was included in the combo), but one of those stick fails memtest on its own and won't boot windows. And I don't think it's a great setup to have 3GB of DDR2 ram on three DIMMs (or maybe it's not a bad setup). Thus I was thinking to either keep the 2 GB I alredy have in, or get a (used) quality 2X2GB, always at 800mhz (feel kinda pointless risking with a 1066mhz that may not work on my MOBO). The second option may get pricier, as some quality (used) 2X2 DDR2 sticks may go for 30+ € +shipping.

Yeah, I thought the same about overclocking. It's old hardware, the silicon has (probably) more than a decade of degradation on it, I wouldn't want to put even more stress on it, even if it sounds cool to push it over 3 Ghz.

Nice build, I like it very much too.

Lately (as in the last 5 years or so), I've been playing with quite a few different socket 775 PCs to get a feel of what each one can do. I can't say I'm an "expert" in s775 systems, but I feel like I do have a good idea about what they are capable of now.

That being said, here is how my though-process goes with these:
- What OS and games will the system target? (XP or 7)
- What "power consumption bracket" will my system fall into? - a hot system with high TDP or a more balanced one that I can run any day any time of the year and not worry that it will rack up too much in electricity or overheat itself?

Based on these two, I decide on the rest of the hardware.
Generally, anything from the early to mid XP era (I define that as anything up to and not including Crysis), I go with a dual core, Win XP, 2-3 GB of RAM max, and a more modest video card in terms of both power consumption and performance (HD4670-HD7570 and GT430-GT730 -class cards are some of my favorites here). At least in my experience, I don't see a point with going with overkill hardware for these older games, because they just cannot take full use of any better hardware (well, except in the video card department maybe.) I also don't like to burn "unnecessary" energy when playing these games, so typically I don't use a quad core CPU for such system. And because this era of games is what I tend to play most frequently, I like to have a system that I can run any time of the year... particularly when it's hot in the summer... and not have to worry that anything in the system will run too hot or make my room too hot.
Now, for late XP era / early Windows 7 era games, I'm more likely to have a quad core CPU in there and 3+ GB of RAM. Whether I go with XP or 7 is a coin toss... though I more often go with Win 7 so I can also use the PC with a modern/supported browser online too. When I do go with a quad core, I typically also pick a more beefy GPU to match it - usually Radeon HD4850 or newer high(er)-end cards up to HD7950 (or the nVidia equivalents.) That way, late XP era and early Win 7 games are more likely to take full advantage of the hardware.

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-12, 08:22:

I'm going to say what I said on another forum recently: "Overclocking in 2025 is pointless. Modern hardware is already so powerful and produces a lot of heat as it is! For retro machines it doesn't make sense either as longevity is now generally desired, more than a few extra FPS."

I agree about OCing being pointless on new hardware.

But for old(er) hardware, it can sometimes be a free performance boost without any adverse effects or penalty in longevity or reliability. It just all depends on the hardware, how far you're pushing the OC, and which particular component you're OCing. For example, I absolutely NEVER OC RAM - both on GPUs or system RAM. I find the performance gains not to be significant enough and the risk of damaging something in the long term - high. But for CPUs, I do it usually up to a reasonable level. Case in point: my socket 939 Athlon 64 3200+ Venice OC'ed from 2 GHz to 2.5 GHz (a 25% increase) - I can do it on the stock V_core voltage and the CPU TDP doesn't go up that much (only about 7-8 Watts.) Better yet, since I'm not quite hitting the clock OC "wall" of that CPU, I can even undervolt the V_core slightly, bringing back the TDP to almost stock numbers. So in essence, I'm getting a 25% increase in clocks without producing more heat or abusing the CPU more than stock settings. In such cases, I think it's worthy to OC.

As a more direct example, I built a cheap PC back in 2018 that I intended for modern gaming. I based it on a Q6600 (same CPU as the O/P), 8 GB of RAM, GTX560 TI, and Windows 7 x64. Since I put a nicer cooler on the CPU, I decided to OC the CPU to ~3 GHz, which is a relatively low OC for these CPUs (but I didn't care to max it out.) What I wanted to try was the OC *with* under-volting the CPU V_core... and it worked! I don't remember what voltage exactly I had for the CPU, but I think it was something like 0.1V less than the stock... making the CPU not use that much more power than stock. FWIW, I used that system up until around 2019 to play Fortnite - a relatively modern and CPU-bound game. The Q6600 actually struggled quite a bit with it (not from the cores getting bogged down with a high load, but from not having some modern instructions, which meant the CPU had to work/rework some instructions to make up for that.) By 2019, the new seasons in Fortnite became too much for that CPU, so that's when I switched to a slightly newer system. Nevertheless, my point about mentioning this is that the OC I did from the stock 2.4 GHz to the OCed 3 Ghz core really helped with CPU-demanding games like Fortnite and what allowed me to play it in the first place.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-12, 08:53:

Yeah, I thought the same about overclocking. It's old hardware, the silicon has (probably) more than a decade of degradation on it, I wouldn't want to put even more stress on it, even if it sounds cool to push it over 3 Ghz.

I wouldn't worry about this. CPUs from that era were still tough-as-nails for the most part. So long as you don't up the V_core voltage, you'll only tickle the CPU slightly with any OC you try. Moreover, that massive CPU cooler is just -begging- to see a bit more work. 😀

I think 3 GHz will be a nice even number to set. On my Q6600 build mentioned above, I did the OC via setting the FSB to 325 MHz (a rather odd number, but it was due to the RAM controller in the NB struggling to do more with those 8 GB of RAM.) With less RAM, I had no problems going higher. But in the end, this worked out OK, because running the FSB and RAM both @ 325 MHz allowed for a 1:1 FSB:DRAM ratio. And 325 x 9 = 2925 MHz... or roughly 2.93 GHz for the CPU - close enough to 3 GHz for me. 😉
I actually still have that rig. It's just been mothballed for wee bit now, due to my interest jumping back to older (and cooler) systems again.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-12, 08:53:

I was really thinking in upgrading it to a low powered 60 series card from nVidia, not more than a 560ti, wich I think is alredy overkill.

Indeed.
Even with my OC'ed Q6600, I wasn't quite able to push my GTX560 TI to its limit. So probably a GTX 550 or GTS450 will be just fine... not to mention, use less power. Speaking of which, that is something you should consider: your PSU. I'm not familiar with that brand of PSU or what's in it... and without more pictures of it, I'd be wary of pushing it too high.

FWIW, I set up my nephew with a PC with Q8300 + GTX560 TI and a "550 Watt" Segotep PSU. The system runs good so far... but I know for a fact that Segotep PSU is actually running right at its max, because it's a cheapo half-bridge design with E13009 BJTs in TO-220 size (for those who don't do "PSU speak": this is really only a 300-350 W PSU tops.)

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-12, 08:53:

So, since I will use this build mostly for games, and the price is not that different, I was wondering what would be more worth to get: An E8600 or a Q9650. Or simply stay with the stock Q6600.

I'd say stay with the Q6600. The Q9650 and the E8600 are higher-end chips, so they will just cost more. Granted they are both newer -45 nm parts with SSE4.1, so if you ever intend to use this PC as a retro modern browser PC (if that even makes sense), then the -45 nm C2D/C2Qs will do a little better. But if not, then the Q6600 should be fine for your intended purpose. And again, if you OC it to about 3-3.2 GHz, you won't be that far behind the stock Q9650 performance and E8600 single core performance.

momaka wrote on 2025-02-12, 20:24:

- What OS and games will the system target? (XP or 7)

Well, for this point, I'd like to tackle up to 2008, max 2009. After that there's Windows 7, and I have both a laptop with an i7 3630QM and GT650m that can play those games (1080p 30, for the most part), or I could cheesy the OS and install it on my Zen2 AM4 main rig when I retire it. But I also found that most games made around the Win7 era do work pretty flawlessly on Win10.
So I would use this system mainly for XP games, from the earliest days up to 2008/09. Maybe connect a projector to it and use it as an home cinema for the living room, with a SATA Blue Ray drive (just like I wanted it back in 2008). Probably not browsing the internet. I alredy have a laptop (previously mentioned) that can do (and still does) the job.

momaka wrote on 2025-02-12, 20:24:

Moreover, that massive CPU cooler is just -begging- to see a bit more work. 😀

Yeah... I got a pretty sweet deal for it new and, THEROETICALLY, I can install it even on both my current Zen4 build (now cooled by a FUMA2) and my planned Zen5 build that's gonna replace my main rig. So I got it and put it in there. It keeps the CPU nice and cool, and it's very silent. Basically I wanted to keep it as cool as possible with air to keep it running for as long as possible in the future.
About OCing:

• the ram won't be touched. I'm alredy running 2GB at 800mhz in dual channel, wich should be the maximum frequency officially supported by my mobo. I may just replace it with a 2x2gb set if I find a good one at a good price, since I don't feel like running it in single channel with three sticks in it to get to 3GB. I don't know if running 4GB could change things that much on a 2008 XP system, so I may just keep the 2GB.
• And on the CPU I wanted to get to 3.0 Ghz, just need to do the math and understand how it's actually done, since it would be my first for a 775 system (and first in general for manual OCs, I usually stick to Auto OC in modern PCs, like running a Ryzen 5 3600 at 4.2 Ghz on all cores). I've alredy read several guides from back in the day, and I think I have a good theoretical grasp on how its done: It's just math.
  Of course, if I wanted to keep the 1:1 ratio with the ram at stock frequencies, I would need to push the FSB to 400mhz. I don't know if the MOBO can take that kind of punishment being that old, and I don't even know its history.
  Or I could do what you did and lower the ram frequency just a tiny bit (may even fix the issues with the broken stick?) and still achieve a 1:1 ratio without touching the voltages themselves. Maybe 350mhz? or 335? Or the 325 you did? I can still try that and see how the system behaves.

Or, since either a Q9650 or an E8600 are not that pricey (for now) used, and both would get me to 3.0 Ghz without using more power or doing any OC, get one of them. The MOBO should support 1333mhz FSB for the CPU, and the BIOS should be alredy up to date. So it's just a matter of understanding how much would games from 2008/09 care about 4 cores or single core performances.

momaka wrote on 2025-02-12, 20:24:

I'm not familiar with that brand of PSU or what's in it... and without more pictures of it, I'd be wary of pushing it too high.

It's not a familiar brand. It's an HKC V-Power 650W. I wouldn't usually purchase PSUs from unknown brands, but I was tricked in getting this one for my other Socket A system (you may have stumbled on my thread about it, IIRC), since it had a rating of 25A on the 5V rail.
It theoretically didn't. The Athlon system brought the 5V rail down to 4.66V (monitoring via Everest, not direct monitoring via multimeter), and I decided to not push my luck with the stability of the system (didn's showed problems). So I had it laying around and, since I basically lucked out on this MOBO combo, I decided to use it. 650W should be more than enough for a stock Core2Quad and a low powered GPU, like a 50 or 60 nVidia class. (the GTX 560ti I eyeballed requires 450w at minimum), and the thing is also quite heavy. It's either decent quality or added ballast to fake quality.
Currently it's behaving nicely in the 775 system (not like it gave instabilities in the Socket A system)
I also don't think it should hit a power limit with an eventual OC to 3.0 ghz.

BUT, if I have to feel more confortable with a not know PSU brand, I would stick with stock components, and at that point I should get the perfect match for 2008/2009 games, wich is either an E8600 or a Q9650, since they aren't (yet) that expensive. Just need to recall what games from that era prefers: High clock on single core of more than 2 cores.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-12, 21:31:

About OCing:

• the ram won't be touched. I'm alredy running 2GB at 800mhz in dual channel, wich should be the maximum frequency officially supported by my mobo. I may just replace it with a 2x2gb set if I find a good one at a good price, since I don't feel like running it in single channel with three sticks in it to get to 3GB. I don't know if running 4GB could change things that much on a 2008 XP system, so I may just keep the 2GB.

Unfortunately Intel has taken down their article about "flex memory" if I remember the term correct. That is, for some chipsets, they run dual channel memory on the amount of memory that is equal in the two channels, and then single channel for the rest, so in the case of 2x1 gb in one channel and 1x1 in the other, the 2 first gb should run in dual channel, and the last gb in single. Haven't tried it out (yet) though.

There's a bit about it here and a link to the (unfortunately removed) article from Intel

https://www.cpu-world.com/forum/viewtopic.php … ht=flex+channel

H3nrik V! wrote on 2025-02-12, 22:58:

Unfortunately Intel has taken down their article about "flex memory" if I remember the term correct. That is, for some chipsets, they run dual channel memory on the amount of memory that is equal in the two channels, and then single channel for the rest, so in the case of 2x1 gb in one channel and 1x1 in the other, the 2 first gb should run in dual channel, and the last gb in single. Haven't tried it out (yet) though.

There's a bit about it here and a link to the (unfortunately removed) article from Intel

https://www.cpu-world.com/forum/viewtopic.php … ht=flex+channel

Wayback machine comes to the rescue!

Now, I don't know how relatable is this to a socket 775 system (article is from 2017). The MOBO manual doesn't even tell you wich DIMMs are the fastest (I guessed the orange ones), and, by reading articles of the times, if you run three DIMMs, the system reverts to single channel operations, keepig the dual channel only when you populate two alternate DIMMs.
I currently have 3 working 1GB sticks and a dead one. I don't think I should get dual channel with three DIMMs by reading past articles, so I either run 2GB in a 2x1 setup, or get 4GB in a 2x2 setup. (or I could even get a new 1GB stick, if I found a similar one).

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-13, 08:42:

Wayback machine comes to the rescue! […]
Show full quote

H3nrik V! wrote on 2025-02-12, 22:58:

Unfortunately Intel has taken down their article about "flex memory" if I remember the term correct. That is, for some chipsets, they run dual channel memory on the amount of memory that is equal in the two channels, and then single channel for the rest, so in the case of 2x1 gb in one channel and 1x1 in the other, the 2 first gb should run in dual channel, and the last gb in single. Haven't tried it out (yet) though.

There's a bit about it here and a link to the (unfortunately removed) article from Intel

https://www.cpu-world.com/forum/viewtopic.php … ht=flex+channel

Wayback machine comes to the rescue!

Now, I don't know how relatable is this to a socket 775 system (article is from 2017). The MOBO manual doesn't even tell you wich DIMMs are the fastest (I guessed the orange ones), and, by reading articles of the times, if you run three DIMMs, the system reverts to single channel operations, keepig the dual channel only when you populate two alternate DIMMs.
I currently have 3 working 1GB sticks and a dead one. I don't think I should get dual channel with three DIMMs by reading past articles, so I either run 2GB in a 2x1 setup, or get 4GB in a 2x2 setup. (or I could even get a new 1GB stick, if I found a similar one).

Thanks, I'd been trying to find that again a lot of times 🙂 but yeah, you're probably right that it doesn't apply to s775 systems, though. Bummer 🙁

H3nrik V! wrote on 2025-02-13, 15:02:

Thanks, I'd been trying to find that again a lot of times 🙂 but yeah, you're probably right that it doesn't apply to s775 systems, though. Bummer 🙁

I'll do more tests with 2Gb on dual channels. If I'll found myself starving for ram, I'll get a 2X2 800 mhz corsair kit, even if it cost me 30€+ shipping.
Honestly, I feel it's more worth to spend a similar amount of money on a new GPU and CPU (those go for way cheaper than RAM).
Are you team 4 (bu slower) cores or 2 (but faster) cores?

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-13, 16:30:

I'll do more tests with 2Gb on dual channels. If I'll found myself starving for ram, I'll get a 2X2 800 mhz corsair kit, even if it cost me 30€+ shipping.
Honestly, I feel it's more worth to spend a similar amount of money on a new GPU and CPU (those go for way cheaper than RAM).

Is DDR2 really this expensive now? I thought 4 GiB modules were bad.

GemCookie wrote on 2025-02-14, 18:02:

Is DDR2 really this expensive now? I thought 4 GiB modules were bad.

Well, it is if you want tight timings. Like, a 2X2gb set of Corsair's 4-4-4-12 at 800 mhz goes for 30 or 40 € +shipping on ebay.

That's just a tiny bit more expensive than a Q9650...

If you can, always go for 2x2GB DDR2 setup.
Remember about memory remap feature (Intel chipsets), if you plan to use 64-bit OS with over 4GB of RAM.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-12, 21:31:

Of course, if I wanted to keep the 1:1 ratio with the ram at stock frequencies, I would need to push the FSB to 400mhz. I don't know if the MOBO can take that kind of punishment being that old, and I don't even know its history.

It will be fine if you keep the NB and SB cool (good airflow on them, or add dedicate fan on each if really needed.)
If you put FSB to 400 MHz, then you'll need to limit the CPU multiplier to either 7 (2.8 GHz for the CPU) or 8 (3.2 GHz for the CPU.)
Alternatively, if you lower the RAM clock to 333, then you can leave the CPU multiplier stock and run the FSB at it's max officially supported (333 MHz... which is 1333 MHz quad-pumped.) And since you'd be downclocking the RAM, you could use it at lower timings if it doesn't do that by itself.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-12, 21:31:

Or, since either a Q9650 or an E8600 are not that pricey (for now) used, and both would get me to 3.0 Ghz without using more power or doing any OC, get one of them. The MOBO should support 1333mhz FSB for the CPU, and the BIOS should be alredy up to date. So it's just a matter of understanding how much would games from 2008/09 care about 4 cores or single core performances.

Depends on each particular game / game engine we are talking about.

If Crysis (2007) is a must on your list of games, then stick to a Quad Core CPU
Mirror's Edge, a game that runs on the Unreal 3 engine (IIRC), will happily run with just 2 fast cores... but if you have 4 cores, occasionally, it will use the 3rd and 4th core. I have played this game a lot, but have not looked too carefully at what the difference is between when it runs on 4+ cores and on just a dual core. All I can tell you about it is that it runs much much faster or a dual core CPU (even a slower one) than a very fast single core CPU.
Next, Valve's Source Engine (e.g. Half-Life 2, Counter-Strike Source, Portal, Portal 2, and etc.): this one will be absolutely satisfied... and even give better results... on a faster dual core CPU than a slower quad core CPU. On my OC'ed Q6600 back in 2018 when I built it and played CS Source via Steam on it, I noticed that only 2 of the 4 cores on the CPU ever got used. The other two were just sitting there doing nothing.
Another game from the mid-2000's that I like quite a bit: Test Drive Unlimited. This one being older pretty much doesn't care for anything more than a dual core CPU. Same goes for the Need For Speed series up to Carbon. Not sure about the newer ones.
Lastly, Call of Duty Modern warfare and Modern Warfare 2: I haven't tested these two, but a former co-worker buddy of mine did quite extensively when he was building a mini LAN party room in his home... and he got to the conclusion that these games runs just as happily on a high-end C2D as they did when he had then on C2Q (Q6600). So he eventually swapped the CPUs in his LAN party rigs to high-end C2Ds. This also brought down the temperatures in the PCs (they were all tiny mATX cases)... not to mention in the gaming room (10 PCs with Q6600 pump out considerably more heat than same PCs with E8500.)

If you want 3 GHz and don't want to spend too much, go for an E8400. A few years back, albeit very lucky on my part, I got a box of them for nothing more than the price of shipping from a recycler - basically a lifetime supply (40 chips, 🤣.)
And if you want more than 3 GHz without going over the 1333 MHz FSB of the mobo, grab something like an E7500. These are still Woofdale cores with SSE4, but made for 1066 MHz FSB, so they have a higher multiplier to boot. When set for 1333 MHz FSB, in the case of the E7500 you will get 3.6 GHz clock.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-12, 21:31:

It's not a familiar brand. It's an HKC V-Power 650W. I wouldn't usually purchase PSUs from unknown brands, but I was tricked in getting this one for my other Socket A system (you may have stumbled on my thread about it, IIRC), since it had a rating of 25A on the 5V rail.

I do remember it from that thread. But I think we never made it to the point to actually check the voltages with a multimeter to see what it really was doing with the socket A system... so no telling if its 5V rail actually was any good or not.
With that said, if you don't ever intend to return it for warranty, you should probably open it and take a few pictures. At least that's what I always do with my PSUs that I don't care to have warranty on - that way, I can truly know what's hiding in my PSUs and how much I can push them... as well as to know more or less *when* (not if) to expect problems (i.e. the caps to go bad)

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-13, 08:42:

I currently have 3 working 1GB sticks and a dead one. I don't think I should get dual channel with three DIMMs by reading past articles, so I either run 2GB in a 2x1 setup, or get 4GB in a 2x2 setup. (or I could even get a new 1GB stick, if I found a similar one).

OR, you could do 2x 1 GB and 2x 512 MB for a total of 3 GB. 😁 That will give you the best possible max in WinXp without "loosing" any RAM to 32-bit limit. (Though in theory, you could also do 4 GB and dedicate 1 GB to a RAM disk, then have XP pagefile mapped on that RAM disk.)

By the way, before you condemn one of the sticks dead, see if bumping down the speed to 333 MHz (666 MHz DDR2) brings it back alive. It could be a flaky module... or it could be the mobo RAM controller crapping out. On my Q6600 build, it was the RAM controller that was crapping out at 400 MHz (800 MHz DDR2 speed) when I wanted to run 4x 2 GB (8 GB total)... and this was no less on a EVGA 780i-SLI - a rather high-end mobo. Instead of going down to 6 or 4 GB, I opted to turn down the memory speed and that fixed my stability issues (and also worked nicely for a 1:1 RAM:FSB ratio, so it was a win-win in the end.) But it's actually quite a common issue with many s775 boards: if you populate all 4 memory slots and try to run them at max speed (and especially if they are high capacity modules, like 2 GB like mine), you might get errors/instability/no POST.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-14, 19:16:

Well, it is if you want tight timings. Like, a 2X2gb set of Corsair's 4-4-4-12 at 800 mhz goes for 30 or 40 € +shipping on ebay.

Skip the "low timings" special OC RAM. You really won't see that much of a performance gain from it in games - not nearly as much as a higher CPU core clock (or better GPU) - at least for these old DDR2 systems.

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-13, 16:30:

Are you team 4 (bu slower) cores or 2 (but faster) cores?

Always been a sucker for more cores, I was pretty eager to get a Q8200 when they came out (I've skating always been a sucker for second generation process node).

But - I'm an overclocker by heart, ever since Celeron 300A, so more cores, more clock 🤣

Nice build! That would have been quite the battleship in 2008.

In 2008 I wanted a 65 watt phenom X4 @ 3.2ghz! Unfortunately that came out 18 months too late and 80 watts too hot 🙁

momaka wrote on 2025-02-15, 01:08:

It will be fine if you keep the NB and SB cool (good airflow on them, or add dedicate fan on each if really needed.)
If you put FSB to 400 MHz, then you'll need to limit the CPU multiplier to either 7 (2.8 GHz for the CPU) or 8 (3.2 GHz for the CPU.)
Alternatively, if you lower the RAM clock to 333, then you can leave the CPU multiplier stock and run the FSB at it's max officially supported (333 MHz... which is 1333 MHz quad-pumped.) And since you'd be downclocking the RAM, you could use it at lower timings if it doesn't do that by itself.

Well, both the NB and SB have their own nice heatsinks (picture of them), but are now covered by the huge cooler on the CPU, so I don't know how much airflow is reaching them right now, and if they manage to dissipate some of their heat to the cooler's heatsink. The air has to do a bend around the DVD drive bay to reach them and the CPU... Of course, I could just max the FSB to the officially supported frequency and call it a day, wich would bring the CPU clock to 3 GHZ. It's not like the Q9650 or the E8600 use a lower FSB than 333. Of course, I would like to do this without overvolting, so not to spike up to much the power usage.

momaka wrote on 2025-02-15, 01:08:

Depends on each particular game / game engine we are talking about. […]
Show full quote

Depends on each particular game / game engine we are talking about.

If Crysis (2007) is a must on your list of games, then stick to a Quad Core CPU
Mirror's Edge, a game that runs on the Unreal 3 engine (IIRC), will happily run with just 2 fast cores... but if you have 4 cores, occasionally, it will use the 3rd and 4th core. I have played this game a lot, but have not looked too carefully at what the difference is between when it runs on 4+ cores and on just a dual core. All I can tell you about it is that it runs much much faster or a dual core CPU (even a slower one) than a very fast single core CPU.
Next, Valve's Source Engine (e.g. Half-Life 2, Counter-Strike Source, Portal, Portal 2, and etc.): this one will be absolutely satisfied... and even give better results... on a faster dual core CPU than a slower quad core CPU. On my OC'ed Q6600 back in 2018 when I built it and played CS Source via Steam on it, I noticed that only 2 of the 4 cores on the CPU ever got used. The other two were just sitting there doing nothing.
Another game from the mid-2000's that I like quite a bit: Test Drive Unlimited. This one being older pretty much doesn't care for anything more than a dual core CPU. Same goes for the Need For Speed series up to Carbon. Not sure about the newer ones.
Lastly, Call of Duty Modern warfare and Modern Warfare 2: I haven't tested these two, but a former co-worker buddy of mine did quite extensively when he was building a mini LAN party room in his home... and he got to the conclusion that these games runs just as happily on a high-end C2D as they did when he had then on C2Q (Q6600). So he eventually swapped the CPUs in his LAN party rigs to high-end C2Ds. This also brought down the temperatures in the PCs (they were all tiny mATX cases)... not to mention in the gaming room (10 PCs with Q6600 pump out considerably more heat than same PCs with E8500.)

If you want 3 GHz and don't want to spend too much, go for an E8400. A few years back, albeit very lucky on my part, I got a box of them for nothing more than the price of shipping from a recycler - basically a lifetime supply (40 chips, 🤣.)
And if you want more than 3 GHz without going over the 1333 MHz FSB of the mobo, grab something like an E7500. These are still Woofdale cores with SSE4, but made for 1066 MHz FSB, so they have a higher multiplier to boot. When set for 1333 MHz FSB, in the case of the E7500 you will get 3.6 GHz clock.

I actually have no idea. Some of those games happily runs of Windows 10, Crysis was even released on GOG a few years back, and I can easily install the GOG files over my officially DVD copy of the game. Same thing the NFS titles, they have huge communities with tons of fixes, it's a no issue running Underground 2 at 4K 60 on my windows 10 rig, and not a particularly fast one anymore.
Currently I've installed the first Assassin's Creed, COD4 and the original PC port of Crazy Taxi (wich runs at 50 fps cap, making it play slower than the arcade original, and another pointless exercise in futility, since there's a much newer port and the dreamcast restoration mod).
I may go and install other games that have issues with windows 10 and have less interest in the community for fixes, so I may just not care that much about the CPU, for now. It's a shame that I can't install on it games from my steam library... I guess only GOG makes this easier (that Assassin's Creed is the Director's Cut from GOG. All I had to do is create an offline installer from my Win10 PC and copy it on WinXP. It installed and worked first boot).
I was thinking to run the original Bioshok (not the remaster), since that one's also on GOG.
But, being all of them from GOG... They also just works on Windows 10. So, those games won't be the focus. Mostly boxed games I have laying around, like Test Drive Unlimited (that you quoted), but even that one, thanks to community support and mods, it just works on Windows 10. See? It's much harder to justify a dedicated XP build for games. I may actually get an SSD and dualboot Win 7 on it, once I get a better GPU. Thus I should be able to extend the cover of this machine up to 2012/2013.

momaka wrote on 2025-02-15, 01:08:

I do remember it from that thread. But I think we never made it to the point to actually check the voltages with a multimeter to see what it really was doing with the socket A system... so no telling if its 5V rail actually was any good or not.
With that said, if you don't ever intend to return it for warranty, you should probably open it and take a few pictures. At least that's what I always do with my PSUs that I don't care to have warranty on - that way, I can truly know what's hiding in my PSUs and how much I can push them... as well as to know more or less *when* (not if) to expect problems (i.e. the caps to go bad)

I mean, it's still a new unit, I doubt caps are alredy going bad (if they ever will in a short amount of time). And except from Everest telling me it wasn't keeping the voltages (dropping to 4.6v), the socket A system never faltered. No sudden shutdowns or instabiities during heavy games. I had problems booting some games, even DOS one, but I blame that on the fact it has two GPUs in it (the AGP one is in the NB), and some games won't recognize the faster GPU in the PCI slot.
But then I just got myself an enermax that can keep the voltages in spec (barely), so I took that thing out of the system to make sure it won't ever have problems.
It's just 650w, so I don't know how much headroom I have for OCing, but I hope that soon I'll be able to replace the main rig too, thus freeing it's 750w power supply from sharkoon that I know it's good and runs well, even if it's 5 years old.
And, if it should bork itself, I still have the receipt and the two years of warranty on it.

momaka wrote on 2025-02-15, 01:08:

OR, you could do 2x 1 GB and 2x 512 MB for a total of 3 GB. 😁 That will give you the best possible max in WinXp without "loosing" any RAM to 32-bit limit. (Though in theory, you could also do 4 GB and dedicate 1 GB to a RAM disk, then have XP pagefile mapped on that RAM disk.)

By the way, before you condemn one of the sticks dead, see if bumping down the speed to 333 MHz (666 MHz DDR2) brings it back alive. It could be a flaky module... or it could be the mobo RAM controller crapping out. On my Q6600 build, it was the RAM controller that was crapping out at 400 MHz (800 MHz DDR2 speed) when I wanted to run 4x 2 GB (8 GB total)... and this was no less on a EVGA 780i-SLI - a rather high-end mobo. Instead of going down to 6 or 4 GB, I opted to turn down the memory speed and that fixed my stability issues (and also worked nicely for a 1:1 RAM:FSB ratio, so it was a win-win in the end.) But it's actually quite a common issue with many s775 boards: if you populate all 4 memory slots and try to run them at max speed (and especially if they are high capacity modules, like 2 GB like mine), you might get errors/instability/no POST.

I ruled out the memory controller being the issue when I tested all four stiks one by one, in several slots, and only one fails to boot, or barely goes past boot. All the other booted the sistem, ran Ubuntu and even passed memtest without issues. Memtest would fail only when I added the broken stick into the mix.
I also noticed that, except the one that crapped itself, the other two are not a pair. They all are 800mhz, but the one that crapped itself is a 5-5-5-18 1.9v. So I have another one like it that works and then i have:

• a 5-5-5-12 at 1.9v
• a 4-4-4-12 at 2.1v

I seriously didn't even noticed while building the system. The guy that sold me the MOBO probably got the 5-5-5-18 sticks with the sistem, and then upgraded one GB at a time to fill the four slots. Of maybe picked them up from a bin to make the deal even more enticing that what alredy was.
I'm not really into mixing sticks of ram with different voltages and latencies. And I want to retain dual channel, that's why I didn't just run 3x1 GB. And that's why...

momaka wrote on 2025-02-15, 01:08:

Skip the "low timings" special OC RAM. You really won't see that much of a performance gain from it in games - not nearly as much as a higher CPU core clock (or better GPU) - at least for these old DDR2 systems.

I bited the bullet and got myself a 2X2 corsair kit at 4-4-4-12. Yeah, exactly one of those special OC RAM sticks, since I managed to shave off 5€ from the price by asking the seller. It's a tested kit, the seller declared both sticks passed memtest, are perfectly working, and even put a 1yr warranty on them (I should probably print a PDF of the listing, to keep a memo of it).
All in all it's a minor setback in my plan, and I can actually sell off the working stick as "working and tested" for cheap. Maybe even sell the ded one as "for parts".
Maybe, if I had read this before, I could've just took a new old stock of normal 800mhz kingston sticks, plenty of them around, and still avoiding those cheap brands that you can find for new even on amazon.

And, at this point, I really may just OC the FSB up to it's officially supported 333mhz (wich would be requireds for either a Q9650 or an E8600), and just downclock and even downvolt the ram to get a 1:1 ratio, hoping I wont have to overvolt the FSB (or not overvolt it that much), just like I said in the beginning.
I'll recoup the money spent on getting a full set of ram by not spending money on the CPU, and keeping the Q6600, and run it at 333mhz FSB, and also waiting before getting a 560ti (or any other GPU). Unless I find a deal I can't refuse. 😜

H3nrik V! wrote on 2025-02-15, 23:47:

Always been a sucker for more cores, I was pretty eager to get a Q8200 when they came out (I've skating always been a sucker for second generation process node).

But - I'm an overclocker by heart, ever since Celeron 300A, so more cores, more clock 🤣

Then I may try a light OC on it, once the new ram arrives. It should be a factory OCd one, so I won't have to touch it, but I can try to push the FSB to 333mhz. Afterall, that's the same freqency it would have to reach if I buy either a Q9650 or an E8600.
I could even downclock and downvolt the ram to get a 1:1 ratio with the FSB, at that point.

douglar wrote on 2025-02-16, 15:43:

Nice build! That would have been quite the battleship in 2008.

In 2008 I wanted a 65 watt phenom X4 @ 3.2ghz! Unfortunately that came out 18 months too late and 80 watts too hot 🙁

Yup, I actually got the itch to build this while, backing up the HDD from my old Socket A sistem, I found a screenshoot of a list of parts that a friend of mine made for me back in 2008. It was a 2000€ DDR3 775 system. Without the MOBO in that price.
So yeah, I wanted to see how much it would cost me to get as close as possible to it. Currently I'm still below 200€ for all of it (even including the recently ordered RAM).

Mondodimotori wrote on 2025-02-16, 17:42:

H3nrik V! wrote on 2025-02-15, 23:47:

Always been a sucker for more cores, I was pretty eager to get a Q8200 when they came out (I've skating always been a sucker for second generation process node).

But - I'm an overclocker by heart, ever since Celeron 300A, so more cores, more clock 🤣

Then I may try a light OC on it, once the new ram arrives. It should be a factory OCd one, so I won't have to touch it, but I can try to push the FSB to 333mhz. Afterall, that's the same freqency it would have to reach if I buy either a Q9650 or an E8600.
I could even downclock and downvolt the ram to get a 1:1 ratio with the FSB, at that point.

Yeah, don't know hoppe fragile they've become over the years. Back when they were new and plentiful I didn't worry much. But one might want to be cautious today - or at least that would always be my recommendation at least 😉

Looks really awesome and neat. XP is my favorite OS and it is always good to see XP builds.