comrade, what do you mean that graph proves me wrong? That graph shows the Hyper 212+ delivering the best performance, as the article explains "lower line is the best performance in this presentation of the data - lower temperatures represent better performance."
And please do not call people names in our forums.
I suggest you take a look at Evils pics (page 3):
its like a manual for cable management 
@evil you were looking at idle and who idles enough for that graph to be relevant under load its in the middle.
I though Mike was looking to get the most bang for his buck, which is why the dual 4850's would also be a good choice.
And thanks for the compliment Rip, I am flattered for someone to take notice
Oops, that was Arson's cable management, my bad...... here's the pic I was looking for :P:
I thought you haven't purchased a new graphics card yet. 
well i aimed for the most bang for my buck thats why i bought a e8400 but i never skimped on cooling solutions especially if he wants to overclock.
also why buy 2 4850s direct x11 is out i would buy something like a 5850 or if nvidia releases a mid end fermi.
well i aimed for the most bang for my buck thats why i bought a e8400 but i never skimped on cooling solutions especially if he wants to overclock.
also why buy 2 4850s direct x11 is out i would buy something like a 5850 or if nvidia releases a mid end fermi.
Oh, you did not want to skimp on cooling? Then why didn't you tell us that you were using a liquid nitrogen cooling kit?
Also, if you had paid any attention to Mike's posts, you'd know that he already owns the 4850's.
well i aimed for the most bang for my buck thats why i bought a e8400 but i never skimped on cooling solutions especially if he wants to overclock.
also why buy 2 4850s direct x11 is out i would buy something like a 5850 or if nvidia releases a mid end fermi.
I cant believe e8400/e8500 are still over performing, quite amazing.
your obviously an idiot because its not measured in ghz its measured in Celsius.
"Temperature in Degrees Celsius (°C)Shorter bars are better"in theory the more you overclock a processor the more voltage you have to add to it and we all know that electricity creates heat.
Here is a graph from the link posted. This graph is misleading and let me tell you why. But first, a graph to show you what I'm talking about
^ There you can plainly see on the left is degrees celcius. On the bottom you can see the CPU speed in gigahertz.
Gigahertz on any given processor is not an accurate measurement of heat production. Even two processors with the same specs and stepping can produce different amounts of heat and require different amounts of voltage.
The proper way to express a graph for heat production or thermal conductivity would be celcius on the left, watts on the bottom.
Keep in mind I took physics in college. Not to mention I've been overclocking processors since I was 11 and had my first 486 processor.
They are referencing clock speed on a single CPU to give a representation of heat production increase per increase in clock cycle.
How is the graph not legit? Assuming of course they used a fixed multiplier and did not modify voltage settings, there should be no problem as the control variables haven't been modified other than that of the front side bus speed.
(of course most people aren't smart enough to follow the simple rules of an experiment, and they should have posted those settings to confirm)
A voltage to temperature graph would have been more enlightening but it does not change the fact that the graph does represent valid data, though depending on the variables may not be entirely accurate about those specific temperatures. Yet the comparison should have no change as they (i would assume) all tested at each clock cycle with the same settings for each cooler.
I cant believe e8400/e8500 are still over performing, quite amazing.
my system is still par with current systems using virtual mark 
(the default system on the site)
Things mike said
Honestly, you don't really need to upgrade your cards yet unless you really need dx11 or the epeen.
Did you buy that CM power supply already? If so there is no point in upgrading to something of equal value already. If you plan on continuously upgrading i recommend a 1k PS just so you don't have to worry about something else new to buy when you upgrade. But that's a personal opinion.
Vista is dx11 capable if you have that.
Things comrade said
Same here, my e8500 at 4ghz(most e8xxx are capable of) is still chucking along, right up there with i7's.
I'm waiting for sandybridge, intel's new socket debuting is January to come out before i think about upgrading.
Hrmm. Yeah i'd go ahead and get new cards if this is your one time upgrade just to have the dx11 capability for future games. Which cards you get is up to you however those 275's are not dx11 capable so that would kill it for me. I would probably wait another month before buying a new set of cards as I'm still betting those 5850 will come down to around 200-250 USD a piece.
Another thing i look at is resale value, which majorly has to do with brand. I love xfx for its double lifetime warranty, because whoever buys my card will get a warranty with it. That is something almost no one else can offer.
Power supply is up to you it's hard to say what kind of pins will be in use 2 years from now.
It could be the same it could be different. The same goes for power requirements, you could be looking at 2k PS's for all we know.
I would probably still recommend the corsair 750/850 I've never heard a cross word about them, and the single rail design will benefit your crossfire system.
Also the shorter cables on the others are not going to be fun in the haf932 it will make cable management a bitch i know this from having to work around it with mine.
