*Official ASUS W90Vp Owners' Lounge*

lmao!
yep. and it's usually some one with under 50 post at that.

yep, w90 is looking better all the time! now if we can get this thing to start maxing out a bit...we can get to some super numbers.
none like 20k 3dmark mind you...would need a qx9300 for that

 

Say Striker,

would them w90 on sale at xoticpc be one of them ones with them updated bios and so is without them freezin issues ???



A Falling Cat named Spangky

9 Lives Only ..

 

Speaking of 20k and the QX9300 does anybody know how that guy overclocked the cpu? I know the X series (extreme) have unlocked multipliers but last I checked to change the multi it had to be done in the bios and notebook bios do not offer that option.

Maybe there is a software program that can change the multi now?

Or was it just plain old SetFSB or Clockgen? If it was the later there is good hope that we can get a high overclock on the Q9000 or Q9100 also.

If it was the first, then we may be out of luck. In the past I see the FSB limits hit way before the CPU GHZ limit, usually because the PCI buss goes out of whack from the software FSB overclock.

 

going to have to say...front side bus...look at the multiplier and look at his bus speed.



and he never explained on just how he did it either....

 

Nice, math says 300fsb is default as 300x9.5 = 2.85ghz the stock speed of that cpu.

So the 2ghz that the Q9000 is stock would equal in reverse math.

300x6.6=2000

So if you manage to get the same FSB overclock your looking at..

416x6.6=2745 so approximately 2.8ghz

Since that was his max overclock and we are not all so lucky to get ram or chipsets that do high fsb, I say 2.4 - 2.5ghz is a safe average overclock.

I would be very happy with that.

Well talk more later guys, I got work to do, im about 30min behind, probably get on right before I go home or when I get home to catch up.

 

where do you think the picture came from..it sure wasn't post number one...lol

have a good one.

 

huh? see...now this is some of that inside joke stuff we talked about earlier..lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by -=$tR|k3r=- View Post
Ck out post #53 of that thread...... I still have not received a reply, least last I checked, LOL!
where do you think the picture came from <--your post #53..it sure wasn't post number one...lol

not talking about where he took his picture of the over clock, but where i grabbed my copy of it to posted here.

you with me now?

 

Aww crud I just relied the qx9300 is 2.53ghz not 2.85 I need to change that math I did...

I'll re-do it later.

 

7.5*416=3120 mhz q9000
9.5*416=3952 mhz qx9300
stock fsb is 1066
over clocked 1664. a difference of 600mhz. quite impressive really.

yeah, i keep checking over there for a reply to what you wrote and to see if anything new was posted.

 

So the multi on the q9000 is 7.5? Yep confirmed the FSB for intel is "quad pummped" so 1066 = 266

266 x 7.5 = 1998 aka 2ghz


if we can pull off 3ghz thats no bad at all, I do not think I would pay near $1000 for a QX9300 just for 600mhz thats half the price of the whole machine and while sure you can benifit from it some depending on the task it wont be very large unless its using all 4 cores @ 100% and most work you need to do like that your probably going to do on a desktop when a q6600 is like $200 and goes to 3.6ghz easy.

 

yep, it's 7.5
the qx9300 is an extreme cpu. people forget this part. ergo the expensive price tag.
if they made a q9300 mobile version. it would be like 500 bucks, if that.

well...you see my cpu...qx9650 so best believe if i go with a w90/m980nu i will have to run a quad. but since i ran a x9000 es Q and had no problems, i would probably run a qx9300 es Q sample. quads are great for rendering/encoding/transcoding. and a handful of games....but it's easier to drop down to two cores (quad chip) than to jump up to four cores(dual core chip)..

 

Yes I agree and thats the idea I am trying to get across to the people that prefer the 2.8ghz dual on the X1 model. I think a non extreme 9300 would still cost more though, $500 is about how much a Q9100 goes for

 

q9100=$851 retail
qx9300= $1038 retail
q9000=$348 retail

humm.... you could have a point there...

 

Not a big retail difference between the two top chips but when looking for them in the cheapest place I can think of (ebay) I find the q9100 much cheaper than the qx9300.

I have not looked for retail e store prices yet you may find it slightly cheaper than MSRP but not by a whole lot.

I think a reputable ebay seller and a q9100 is the way to go if the q9000 ends up not making the cut.

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-INTEL-QUAD-...EM-NOT-ES_W0QQitemZ180334228410QQcmdZViewItem

You get the double sized cache and a 1 higher multi if comparing it to the q9000 and for a fraction of the cost the qx9300.

Im not sure how much the cache is going to effect the q9000, im sure its going to hurt benchmark numbers like wprime but dont see it being a big deal in games or even much of a big deal for video rendering.

 

well...the qx9300 has a rep for performing while over clocked..this q9000 and q9100 still have a ways to go before they are taken seriously....meaning...yep, you guessed it..*us test dummy's* testing it out for them. but if your allowed to over clock, then the q9000 is near as good as the qx9300. you might not hit 20k, but you will be in the 18k to 19k range if you know what your doing... it's still a good move. as long as the q9000 can match the speed of the dual core chips..it will perform the same while gaming.

 

Question, would this chip;

http://cgi.ebay.com/Intel-Core-2-Duo-Mobile-Processor-Core-Quad-Q9100-NEW_W0QQitemZ180330550530QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item180330550530&_trksid=p3911.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1729|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318|301%3A1|293%3A1|294%3A50

work in the W-90? And more importantly, has anybody ever dealt with this seller before?

 

Or pick up an ES QX9300 for $525 shipped. Got mine with E1 stepping off eBay. Was perfectly stable, clocked well, and reasonable temps when @ 3.2Ghz. Anyhow, john.. What the he11 are you still doing here?

 

Do you have a link, that's an insane price.

 

trying to finish up these laptops so i can get them out in the morning....looks like that's a no go...lol

im out now for bed..haha

 

The link? No.. But search for the CPU and the sellers name was bcbg4u or something like that.. He has a running bidding. I just PMd him with my offer and he accepted. He's a Power Seller, so won't be hard to find him.

Night john I'm off to work

 

Indeed I only found them for about $800 buy it now, and the others under auction with bids already over $700

 

Like I said. Ask Buyer a question and make an offer. I offered 525 or 550.. He took me up on it. I never placed a bid. Can't hurt to ask

 

Well it can lol, if you do not handle the transaction officially in ebay you can get scammed.

 

I probably would advise against it because a bad BIOS flash can turn a $600 motherboard into a $20 frisbee, unless you are skilled at hard-flashing.

High scores seem normal, but very high scores seem kinda low. I think 8800M GTXs SLi could hit around 20 or so. I remember people bragging about this when the OCZ Whitebooks started shipping.

well, fancy that. Your stock scores seem to be edging out a desktop 9800 GTX+ SLi so (factoring in the slight loss in horizontal real estate), so I'm guessing the GTX 280M SLi should destroy it then, despite being reduced to by 20%

 

How big of a difference does the processor make in these scores?

 

haha ye true i m scared too. as far as bios revision is concerned i m not good at that and i also read here that if you are not skilled enough n try it might be ruining your mother board which i m not interested in

 

Not very much actually. Crysis is still very much GPU limited. I'm running on 2.66 Ghz quad, but effectively 2.66 dual, since Crysis is only dual capable. John was running at 3.0 Ghz, but his massacre of my rig was due to his GPU, not CPU.

@ichime, might be the drivers, I'm using Nvidia's release.

 

not i ichime:
we are running no AF and 1920x 1080 which of course you spotted

 

Hey John, care to run it at 16x AF? I don't have my D901C nearby, so I can't test it right now.

 

yeah, ill run it right now.

 

Thanks. Remind me to rep you when I can again. lol

 

now how am i going to know that....lol
16x AF/ 1920x1080/dual core/gtx280m clocks

 

John, ur an addict. You may wanna consider the 12 step program.

 

when you work on computers for a living...there is no 12 step program...

 

Here here!!

 

say, aint you suppose to be on that new job buddy?? or are you iphone'n?

madmech, how goes it?

 

Danke .

 

Yeah in my experience it's typically about 40 steps.

 

To the bathroom after eating something bad?

 

Good, writing from a customers trying to recover all of his files for the last 6 years that he moved to the recycle bin... and then deleted LMAO.

Can't run any tests from here I'm afraid.

By the way, I downloaded the demo for Crysis but how do you access the benchmarking feature?

 

speaking of warhammer40k...how are the fps in that game?

good looking out quad!

madmech..im doing almost the same thing now, but the drive had bad sectors..very time consuming project.

 

After setting the game up at 1920x1080 and all settings at high, Open your
x:/crysis/bin64 folder and inside of it is a batch file called GPU benchmark, double click it .

 

Hmm. Not bad results (average 55fps) but game is acting odd.

Runs fine but I get a lot of artifacting unless I put everything on low.
Did not do that first time I loaded it. Was able to run everything med and smooth in beginning. Might re-install game and try again because it used to run better.

 

55 FPS?

What settings are those?

 

testing...

i see a mod got busy over here again...i don't see quite a few of my post...lmao

warhammer:
i was asking about the fps in the game warhammer 40k
and that's why i bring two laptops i str8 let them know...one is for benchmarking and the other one is for fixing their computer..lol

 

Yea, a bit.

He was actually moderately polite, if it was him.

 

yes he was...hahaha

 

If it is 55 fps i would be blown away , here is a run on my desktop with everything set to high and shader's on very high . At 1920x1080

 

Don't know where my last post went but I'll re-post it.

I think there is something wrong with my install as it used to run fine but not I get lots of artifacting. Also, when I run the benchmark it goes three times then stalls. I click any button and the window disappears and I see the Command window with "Can't find specified file" in it.

I will try installing it again as it did work before.

I will run it later as customers get mad at me when I play video games while they are paying 55p/h to fix their computers lol.

 

Tell your customers they are going to have to wait as we have more pressing issues at hand ...

JK