P6N and Quad-Core

Hey Guys,
I´ve got a P6N Mainboard with the Nvidia reference design 680i and C00 revision.In the moment there are no problems, cause there is a C2D E6600 working on it, but i will buy a quad-core cpu soon and I ve often heard about problems with quad-core cpus and the C00 revision. but i only heard about problems with the evga 680i board and not with the p6n. so, has anybody problems with a quad core and the p6n or does anybody know if there are problems with a Quad-Core CPU and the C00 revision? I think the evga 680i and the p6n are nearly the same, aren`t they? They are both the nvidia reference design.
Evga is changing the C00 revision into a D00 revision 4free, does msi also do that?
And is it right, that the p6n isn`t sold any more?
so far
LostDevil

Quote from: AaronYuri on 18-November-07, 04:00:12
You can put an eVGA BIOS on the P6N anyway. They are all manufactured and distrobuted by Foxconn
Yes, but that is not the matter. I wonder if there are problems with the C00 revision of this board. As far as I know you can`t solve these Quad-Core incompatibility with a bios update. You need a new board with a D00 revision to run a Quad Core CPU or can I run a quad core only with a Bios update on a C00 rev?

Similar Messages

T530, HD 4000 and Quad Core: Not Possible?

Hello,
I'm in the market for a new Thinkpad and it seems on the T530, if you go for a quad core (QM CPUs), you're forced to go with nvidia.
Is is set in stone? I ask because I couldn't care less about the nvidia gpu on Linux...
If it is, can the GPU be completely disabled in the BIOS?

JDay wrote:
You get the Nvidia GPU and the HD 4000 (HD 4000 is built into the CPU). It is actually a nice feature to have, especially if you want to use more than 2 monitors at a time. If you only want to use the HD 4000 just select Integrated Graphics in the UEFI firmware (BIOS). I don't think you can upgrade to the quad-core yourself since I am pretty sure you need a different heatsink/fan assembly to prevent overheating. In fact the motherboard may be different as well, which would explain why it is only available with the Nvidia GPU.
The HD4000 should be able to handle enough monitors I can think of. That said you have a good point about the heatsink/fan assembly. Looking at the HW Maintenance Manual, it's definitely not the same piece.
Page 92 of T530 Maintenance Manual.
Bottom line is I guess I'll fork the extra money, even if the GPU isn't really of any use.
Thanks folks.

System overloads and quad core Pro with only 1 gig of RAM - Snow Leopard

That RAM total would suggest that I go out and buy some (expensive) RAM.
But I see from
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=10238432&#10238432
that people are getting memory spikes with LP8 and a lot more than 1 gig. One poster suggests that LP8 has a bug that should've been fixed but wasn't.
8 gigs are so expensive ($2k) that I could get an entire iMac for less - and rumor has it that there may be quad-core models on the way soon.
Which of the following would you do"
1. Amp up to 4GB on this box for $1200 or so?
2. Get just 1GB more to make it 2GB - cheaper?
3. Upgrade to LP9 just to get a bug fix?
A new pro ($3200+, 8 core, 6 gigs is not an option. I'm even gagging at the RAM prices.
I use LP primarily for electronic music, not rock mixes, so I use ES2, Sculpture, ESX. EFM and potentially a lot of track automation.

Hello neighbor (I live in Arlington, MA).
macpro-user wrote:
Which of the following would you do"
1. Amp up to 4GB on this box for $1200 or so?
2. Get just 1GB more to make it 2GB - cheaper?
3. Upgrade to LP9 just to get a bug fix?
Definitely not number 3--LP9 is working pretty well for me, but a lot of users find it to be rather buggy. I'm not saying don't get 9, I'm just saying don't do it with the idea in mind that it will fix all your problems. I buy my RAM from Other World Computing. I'm not sure exactly which model Mac Pro you're running, but you can see here that the most you'll pay for 8GB is about $275. But jumping up to 4GB would significantly improve your situation, so I would recommend starting there--you can always add more later if you need to.

What kind of performance difference would cuda and quad core make in Premiere?

I am torn between spending $1.5k and $2k on a new macbook because the 15inch one has a 650m and i7 but is more expencive. I currently run a beastly system and want something for a mobile rig for more casual projects. How much of a performance boost would I actually get with cuda and a quad core vs dual core i5?

Lots of discussions like this in the hardware sub-forum http://forums.adobe.com/community/premiere/hardware_forum?view=discussions
Many good links, with some performance charts, at http://ppbm7.com/index.php/tweakers-page
Bottom line... fast CPU and Cuda DO make a difference, along with 2 or more hard drives (or SSD + 7200RPM hard drive) especially for HiDef editing

Trying to decide between i7 and quad core - was told that i7 will overheat?

Hi,
Did some searching in old threads on this here and online - seemed inconclusive so thought I'd ask again since the Core i7s have been out a while now.
I've been trying to decide between buying a quad core and one of the recent MPB 15" i7s (specifically the 2.66 with the hi res non glare screen). I use FCP, DVDSP, Photoshop etc - usually for several hours a day.
Although the quad core seems the logical choice, I'm on a budget would like some wiggle room to get some other gear - if I get the MPB, I'd be able to sell my 13" 2.53 Core 2 Duo and get that gear. On the other hand, I'm trying to think long term in terms of the viability of the machine I buy.
Just got off the phone with MacMall who told me that because the quad core uses physical cores and the MPB Core i7 uses virtual cores there is a substantial overheating issue with the MPB if you're doing sustained work - say working in Photoshop all day, as I often do. He said that the MBP Core i7s weren't designed to do that so the overheating could cause logic board and other issues over time.
Has anyone experienced this?? Or if you have other thoughts on my dilemma, would love to hear them.
Thanks!
cb

I will be a bit more blunt than the other person. Whomever you talked to at MacMall was full of it.
Either you transcribed the details of the conversation wrong, or they have no clue what they're talking about.
Even if you're doing a lot of work in Photoshop all day, the odds of you doing anything that requires a lot of sustained heavy action by the CPU is going to be low. There might be 5 minutes worth of something here or there, but most of the time it's probably going to be pretty limited CPU wise.
There's a reason Apple doesn't put the Core i5 or i7 into the 13" MBPs, and that's because there's just not enough room in the case for the second fan the 15 and 17" models have.
But long story short, Apple isn't like HP or Acer, who will stuff desktop CPUs into laptops because there's some idiot out there who will buy it. And it would be pretty stupid to put a high end CPU like the Core i7 into a laptop, and then expect people NOT to use it.
MBPs aren't really designed for hours worth of sustained work like you'd get from gaming, but I don't think you'd run into any problems with Photoshop.

Is there a noticeable difference between Dual Core i7 and Quad Core i7?

Hi everyone.
I'm going to be a college freshman this fall. I'm looking at 13" MacBook with Retina Display with dual core i7. I'm also looking at the 15" MacBook Pro with Retina Display with Quad Core i7. I want to major in science and have a concentration in photography, which means that I will run programs like Excel, PowerPoint (or keynote), and Photoshop.
Anyways, will there be a noticeable difference between a Dual Core i7 processor and a Quad i7 processor?
Thanks!

Ceteris Paribus, the quad-core will be twice as fast as the dual-core.

Parallel_max_server and quad- Core

Hello community,
A machine has 4 processors of type "Quad-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 8360 SE". How i have to set parallel_max_servers when is required to set "PARALLEL_MAX_SERVERS #DB-CPU-Cores * 10"
I think 16 cores * 10 = parallel_max_servers= 160?
Is that correct?
Best regards
Lutz

Dear Lutz,
Your right Parallel_max_server set to 10xcpu_count.
You have 4 processor with Quad
PARALLEL_MAX_SERVERS can be 0 to 3599 value.but greater value might be performance issue
and appropriate value give parallel execution whn u set parallel_automatic_tuning set to true
SurendraJain

16 GB and quad-core necessary?

I can't decide which MPB I should get. Do you think that 16GB of RAM is overkill? I'm just doing office stuff and I'm running parallels on it. Is the dual-core i5 in the 13" enough or would you get the 15" quad-core?
I want to use the macbook as long as possible and don't want to change it any three years
Thank you for your help!

Since you plan to run virtual machines on your Mac, you need to consider that the VM will take its own portion of your available RAM and one or more of the CPU cores, depending on how you configure it. Generally, within limits, the more RAM you can devote to the VM, the better. Moreover, the guest operating system will have its own virtual memory system, meaning if the RAM you give it is not enough, what's not immediately needed gets written to disk.
Also, since it sounds like you're after a Retina MBP (there's no 15" MBP and the 13" only goes up to 8GB), whatever you choose is what you're stuck with for good since neither RAM or HD is user-replaceable. And since the HD is really an SSD, the less it actually gets written to, the longer it'll last, something to consider if limited RAM causes "page outs" by either the VM guest or the host OS.

T420/T420s and Quad Core

Any chance we'll have an option to upgrade to quad core on these notebooks in the distant future? Is what's on the PSREF sheet final?

I don't remember exactly, but were these announced before the Intel chipset bug was admitted to? If so, I expect everything to come later than expected. It took a while to get the replacement chipsets out.
T61p, T400
formerly x23, x40

Licensing and quad core CPU`s

Hi I hope someone can help me here.
We have CF8 enterprise edition installed on a 32 bit OS with 2 dual core CPU`s.
What I want to know is, can I use the same license to migrate CF8 to a new server that has a 64 bit OS with 2 quad core CPU`s.
Also are there any other issues to take into account?.
Any thoughts from anyone who has experience with this kind of thing would be appreciated. Thank you :-)
P.S I tried asking Adobe customer support but it was a waste of time, they couldnt understand the question. My question does make sense right?

Seconded. Once of the nice things about their licensing is that it actually specified "physical" cpus rather than just cores, as Microsoft stuff often does.
Twin octo-core CPUs for the win!

What the heck is Single Core, Dual Core, and Quad Core Processor Configurat

I am listing an eMac computer on ebay. I have all the information necessary except processor configuration. Do eMacs come with Single, Dual, or Quad processor configurations? Or does it vary? I don't even know what those are really.

Make sure to follow these steps when selling*:
http://www.macmaps.com/selling.html
As was already indicated all eMacs were single core.
Apple didn't start releasing multicore machines until the later G5s.
- * Links to my pages may give me compensation.

P6N Diamond+Quad core overclocking - Help if you have this board.

Am having some issues trying to get even the simplest overclock on this board plus some wierd stuff it is doing with ram settings. Can't get linked setting to work.
I've read all of the 680i tutorials. Nvidia, XS, HardOCP..............I've read Toms Hardware pre-release review. Basically anything I could find..............
Chip is running cool and rock stable at stock settings with either bios.

ok lads - here we go...
it's been a very interesting and revealing morning for me - spent the last 5 hours tweaking the bios, then testing, then tweaking, then testing. these are the results:
note 1: unless otherwise stated, all settings are 'optimised defaults' with 'CE1' disabled (go into 'advanced BIOS features/cpu feature' and press F4 if you can't find it) and 'spread spectrum' disabled.
note 2: unless otherwise stated, 'system clock mode' is set to manual and the memory is set to 800 and timings are on auto.
note 3: default voltages are used unless stated
note 4: each prime95 test is carried out for 5 minutes only
note 5: i'm using a thermaltake kandalf vd4000 case with built-in liquid cooling system. my water-cooled cpu temp in the bios is 19oC (can't seem to get the degree sign using the tip at the top of this page)
note 6: cpu is q6600. memory is 2x1gb xms2 dominator pc2-8500. vga is gainward 8800gtx. psu is hiper 5th gen type-r 770w. bios version is 1.2.
note 7: core temp 0.95 was used for establishing cpu temperature. (apparently, this gives default readings that are 15oC higher than the actual relevant cpu temperature).
test 1 (stock cpu setting):
fsb set to 1066
=2.4ghz
error-free prime95 for 5 minutes: YES
max load temp: 46
test 2:
fsb set to 1166
=2.62ghz
error-free prime95 for 5 minutes: YES
max load temp: 47
test 3:
fsb set to 1206
=2.71ghz
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 47
decided to try pumping some more volts into the cpu to see if i could get it stable in prime95
test 4:
fsb set to 1206
=2.71ghz
cpu voltage increased by 0.0125
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 47
test 5:
as above, but cpu voltage increased by 0.0250
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 47
test 6:
as above, but cpu voltage increased by 0.0375
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 48
test 7:
as above, but cpu voltage increased by 0.0500
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 48
test 8:
as above, but cpu voltage increased by 0.0625
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 49
test 9:
as above, but cpu voltage increased by 0.0750
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 49
test 10:
as above, but cpu voltage increased by 0.0875
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 49
test 11:
as above, but cpu voltage increased by 0.1000
error-free for 5 minutes: NO (4 cores failed within 30 seconds)
max load temp: 50
this took me to the recommended limit for voltage for the q6600, which is 1.375v.
it seems i can safely say that changing the cpu voltage makes absolutely no difference at all.
still keeping the fsb at 1206, the next thing i tried was increasing the NB voltage to 1.275v and keeping the cpu voltage at +0.1000
these settings still couldn't get prime95 to run error-free for more than a few seconds.
keeping the fsb at 1206, cpu voltage at +0.1000 and the NB voltage at 1.275, the next thing for me to try was increasing the 'fsb vtt voltage' by 2%
SUCCESS!!! SUCCESS!! SUCCESS!!
using the above settings, prime95 ran error-free for 5 minutes.
my next problem was trying to work out which of the above voltages settings was the kicker.
keeping the fsb at 1206, i returned the cpu voltage back to default and kept the nb voltage at 1.275 and the 'fsb vtt voltage' at 2%.
SUCCESS!! SUCCESS!! SUCCESS!!
prime95 ran error-free for 5 minutes.
next test was keeping the fsb at 1206, the cpu voltage at default. i also returned the nb voltage to default but left the 'fsb vtt voltage' at 2%.
SUCCESS!! SUCCESS!! SUCCESS!!
prime95 error-free for 5 minutes again!
it seems like the vtt voltage is an important player in getting the system to appear stable.
the next test, i set fsb to 1254 giving 2.82ghz.
keeping all voltages on default except the 'fsb vtt voltage' which i kept at 2%.
prime95 produced errors again, pretty much within the first few seconds...
the next test, i kept fsb at 1254, with default voltages, but the 'fsb vtt voltage' was increased to 4%
SUCCESS!! SUCCESS!! SUCCESS!!
prime95 ran error-free for 5 minutes.
all of a sudden, it seems that regardless of the other settings, the only voltage that matters is the 'fsb vtt voltage'
next test, fsb was set to 1278=2.87ghz.
vtt voltage was 4%
prime95 ran error-free for 5 minutes: YES
cpu temp during load: 49o
next test, fsb was set to 1302=2.92ghz
vtt voltage was 4%
prime95 ran error-free for 5 minutes: YES
cpu temp: 49o
next test, fsb was set to 1326=2.98ghz
vtt voltage was 4%
prime95 ran error-free for 5 minutes: YES
cpu temp: 49o
next test, fsb was set to 1350=3.03ghz
vtt voltage was 4%
CPU FAILED TO POST AND REQUIRED BIOS RESET
next test, fsb was kept at 1350=3.03ghz
vtt voltage increased to 6%
booted fine, but computer froze during prime95
next test, fsb was kept at 1350
vtt voltage was increased to 8%
again, pc froze during prime95
next test, fsb was kept at 1350
vtt voltage was increased to 12%
computer failed to post, requiring reset.
12% was as far as i was comfortable going to, as i'm not sure of the consequences of having this set too high.
it seemed i had reached the limit as far as pushing the fsb goes.
i returned the vtt voltage back to 4% and lowered the fsb to 1334 (i had a hunch that anything over 1333 would give me problems). again, this failed to post.
i set the vtt voltage to 6% - again, it failed to post.
i set the vtt voltage to 8% and again, it failed to post.
i lowered the fsb JUST ONE NOTCH to 1333 and set the vtt voltage to 4%.
this gives an exact cpu speed of 3.000ghz
i'm not sure if this is a coincidence or not, but this setting posted, booted and ran prime95 for 5 minutes without any errors.
it then ran prime95 for over an hour with no errors.
curiously, i set the fsb back up a notch to 1334 and it refused to post, requiring a bios reset.
as i said, it seems 1333 is the absolute limit that i can set this board to in my system configuration. now i don't know about you, but the fact that 1333 works perfectly stable, and 1334 doesn't even post tells me that there is something not quite right with this board.
is it too much of a coincidence that the cpu/mobo hits a wall at EXACTLY 1333/333/3.0ghz?
the next thing i did was set my memory to 1066 and manually set the timings to 5,5,5,15.
coupled with my new rock solid 3.0ghz q6600, this is about as far as it is physically possible for me to push this setup and i'm more than happy with the results.
now i can't wait for the G0 stepping to see what that can do.
maybe a future bios will help with this - who knows...

13" or 15" is the quad core i7 and additional graphics worth the added money

I am looking to replace my 2009 13.3 macbook pro that I've upgraded with a new retina model. Regardless of which model I get it will have the 1 TB storage and 16GB Ram so really my only debate if I want to pay for the additional screen size, secondary graphics processor, and quad core cpu. I use the system for personal use, web browsing, email, itunes, and I play world of warcraft. However I also use this system for business and run parallels with a widows 7 installation running autocad (2D only), ePlan, excel, Rockwell Automation RSLogix suite and RSNetworx, as well as Siemans WinCC HMI software that utilizes a SQL Database. It is not uncommon for me to have all of the windows side apps running at once with multiple windows of each open.
I know the quad processor and the additional graphics card are better than what is available on the 13" retina but I'm not sure if I will see the difference with my usage. Should I go all the way and get the 15" with the i7 2.6GHz Quad core or settle for the 13" with the i7 2.8GHz Dual core?

Hi eric,
In addition to the factors you mention (and yes, I think the dedicated GPU is significant), here are the GeekBench (the standard for measuring computer speed) scores for your two machines:
13" 7899
15" 13287
Thats a pretty big jump in performance, and yes you will notice it with most of the apps you mention, some more than others.

Should i Take the more expensive Mac mini (quad core) or dual core

Hey guys!
I don't now if I should take the Mac mini with dual core or quad core
I have never had a Mac so I don't now if the quad core (200$ more) is better than the dual core :o
I use it only for standard things (email, web, twitter Mac App Store games)
But it also should not stuck at bit more powerful apps and run crystal clear !!!
I want to have the Mac mini for few years !
Thanks now!

The difference in real performance between dual core
and quad core machines is highly dependent on the
apps one uses and how many at the same time.
If you really only ever have one or perhaps two apps
open at once and if these apps are like web browsers
or email, you may never really notice a difference.
However, if you have many apps open at once or use
apps that can utilize many cores at the same time (typically
imaging and video apps), then there will be a significant
performance increase.
As far as gaming, by and large the most significant impact
on game performance is the graphics processing unit (GPU).
The integrated Intel HD4000 GPU in the Minis can typically
handle mid range games but will struggle on the very highend
games.
Also, if apps are not designed for mutiple core usage, there will be
now real improvement between 2 or 4 core machines. As a matter
of fact, I have a few apps that are faster on my MBP 13" 2.7 GHz
2 core i7 than on my quad core i7 2.0 GHz Mini Server for this
very reason.
So, the bottom line is that for some a quad core machine will
blow away a dual core machine while for others, there will be
no noticable difference.

MSI P6N-SLI AND INTEL QUAD CORE Q8200 NOT SUPPORTED ? BIOS FLASH ?

HI,I have MSI-P6N SLI (MS-7350) pc mainboard and my new processor Intel Quad Core Q8200 not running on this desk.
It possible some bios update or something ?? :(
thanks for answers

Quote from: DaLoona on 02-September-10, 02:46:27
According to this:
http://global.msi.eu/index.php?func=prodcpu2&prod_no=1141&maincat_no=1&orderby=cpu_name%20ASC#menu
"Yorkfield" 45nm quadcores are not going to work on this board, only "wolfdale" 45nm dualcores and even that depends on revision, like Jack mentioned.
So your Q8200 is a no go unfortunatly.
Only the older 65nm "Conroe" quads will work.
and fastest intel processor (not 45nm quad core) ?

P6N and Quad-Core

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for