damn look at that heatsink!

Thats not a heatsink, thats my new airconditioning unit.

kick ass congrats

Had to cum back in here & bump for others to see your kick ass machine... awesome :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

I'm going to get a new pc soon, don't know if I'm going to build one or buy, http://cyberpowerinc.com has some pretty ones!

Believe me I stressed over it plenty. The machine is outadate and overpriced before it even arrives. All you can do is what's best at the time and know it will be

down in price within days....
out of date within months...
and obsolete in about 2 years?

This is CONSTANTLY Debated and argued and was definitely something I lost a bit of sleep over as I desperately searched google for a Definitive answer? and here it is:

About 90% of ignorant morons out there will tell you

?theoretically XP has a 4 Gig ram limit?
?you Should be able to run 4 GIGS on XP?
?XP has a ram limit of 4 GIGS?
and on and on?

In all my searching Only 1 person actually stated that they had achieved 4 GIGs on a XP 32 bit?. And that is basically the KEY factor(32-bit VS 64-bit). One of the factors is the ability of the OS to do PAE(Physical address Extension). This function (PAE) is necessary to address more then 2 GIGS of RAM.

At first? on windows XP 32bit? you could manually activate PAE and get up to 4 GIGS. However, a vulnerability was exposed somewhere down the line and in XP Service Pack 2 they activated DEP (I don?t know what that stands for). DEP locked down something in the OS that Nullified the ability to get up to 4 GIGS.

Only 1 person out of MANY actually claimed to have achieved 4 GIGS on XP 32 bit? and that was nullified by Service Pack 2. The rest were running around with 2 GIGS while saying ?You should be able to do 4 Gigs?



Now, here?s how it relates to your question about Vista?.

Vista comes in 32 bit and 64 bit?. Just like XP... and as previously mentioned in this thread? 64 bit natively(by default) runs PAE which I think can go up to 64 or 128 GIGS assuming you had some crazy setup.


!!!! You need 64 bit architecture (which has PAE by default) to get to 4 or more GIGS!!!

On 32 bit XP or Vista you will end up at about 3.1 GIGS depending on your chipset/motherboard? etc.

I realize this is an extremely long post when all it comes down to is 32 bit ?VS- 64?. But now that you know the history of it?. You can dismiss all these fucking assholes that are going to tell you that you can do 4 GIGS on a 32 bit system? (especially when they have not actually done it them selves).

[QUOTE=tenderobject;12048305]damn, thats fucking sweeet machine.. i wonder what programs are you using to encode vids!
Running a hand full of Video Encoding and Editing Stuff. Really just your typically Windows Media Encoder and Adobe Premiere.

Premiere went to fucking warp speed?. It uses all 4 cores and I can Now edit .wmv files directly where as before the would lagg really bad and I would convert them to .avi just so I could edit smoothly. The conversion process took a lot of time ? total pain in the ass.


This thing REALLY Tears Ass on Video. I just started overclocking and I will post my results here soon.

Yes?. I run Thunder-Ball.net

Not bad, but why not with a dual quad core system (8 cores)?

Be prepared to sacrifice a Lot of time if you do it your self. I found out the hard way that it's not like a few years ago with only a few choices to make.

Now there are dozens of Motherboards and a hand full of CPUs. Ram is even more diverse... speed... latency... quality(leading to ability to overclock).

I must admit it's been a REAL Fuckin mess here... been fucking with it for about a week strait now... but I DO feel the Payoff is WELL Worth it!!

I'm just a do it your self type person when it comes to business things. The up front growing pains are Nothing compared to going with other peoples solutions and depending on them to fix them or get new things done.

To be honest I never even thought of it.

It was hard enough to find dual 775 socket motherboards which usually ended up being for Servers - without all the USB and BIOS functions you need to tune out a worksation.

But I would have come to the same conclusion as taking the QX6700 over the True Quad that is available now. I still want Fast speed in some areas where a quad or dual would spread load out in favor of being able to do more at one time.

Since the majority of my needs on this machine are workstation/user operated (single focused)... this setup is better for me then a server type setup that spreads out more for multitasking.

But, with 4 cores I can still multi task just fine... encoding apps run in the background and I hardly even notice they are running.

That looks like a sweeeet setup for encoding. I want one! :) Best decision you made was to pass on Vista (piece of crap compared to XP).

for that you'd need an LGA-771 mobo/cpu. the qx6700 equivalent is the e5355 which has the same clock speed and cores, but has a 1333MHz FSB

sounds bad ass

See benchmark Results http://www.gfy.com/showthread.php?p=...5#post12064585