Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: 4.4Ghz i7 920 with Seasonic X650

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    23

    4.4Ghz i7 920 with Seasonic X650

    I have following configuration: i7 920 D0, EVGA 760 Classified, 6GB DDR3 2000 CL8. Now i want build a gaming machine and planning on overclocking it ~ 4.4Ghz, running on water, possibly 2 5870s, either a an Intel SSD drive or Vraptor with 1 backup drive. Will the 54a 12v Seasonic X650 be enough for it? Please help me out with your suggestion and is this should i do or not??

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    976

    Re: 4.4Ghz i7 920 with Seasonic X650

    I think the 4.4 GHz is very high and the i7 ramp up with high overclocks in power. You should watch at toms h/w the graphs of it. It goes upto 4.0Ghz and see how the i7 power ramps up quickly. And from 3.8Ghz to 4.4Ghz the peak power literally, the power goes over 100watt. The power levels is not comparable to your configuration, since they only run one video card and their overclock is not as high as yours.
    Searching the forums can help you to find your answers more quickly

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    830

    Re: 4.4Ghz i7 920 with Seasonic X650

    According to me you should not go for Seasonic X-650, because it is not worth. I have seen many gaming machine with seasonic X-650 and its performance was very bad. Instead i saw a gaming machine with Corsair HX 620 and its performance compare to that X 650. So, to be on the safer side use Corsair HX620. and if would like to have cream of crop, then use Seasonic X 650

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,342

    Re: 4.4Ghz i7 920 with Seasonic X650

    In my opinion the seasonic unit is 99.99% modular, whereas the HX650 still has the most of the cables hardwired to the power supply itself. And it is mainly on a matter of personal choice and how clean and tidy you think the inside of your case to be. Both are best at their place with quality units and it are also recommended highly. But just to tell you that 80 plus gold certification is worth in front of this two units.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    666

    Re: 4.4Ghz i7 920 with Seasonic X650

    My review to Seasonic X-650 is better than 92% efficient in some cases. 88% and efficient at 12% load. Noise commentary is limited but ripple looks the best. But i would say too much bad even if it was half the price. I would never be able to justify its efficiency saving in my power bill. I think its not worth to but it. Try any other option instead of this. If money is not your concern than you can buy Seasonic X-650 due its efficiency.
    Last edited by Omari; 28-12-2009 at 10:39 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    656

    Re: 4.4Ghz i7 920 with Seasonic X650

    As you would be knowing seasonic have launched a brand new line-up of units, which dubbed the X-Series. The M12D series is nothing in front seasonic, because they are providing higher performance. It has a full modular design and an in addition 80Plus Gold certification. And with money is concern than it is best performing power supply units you can purchase. With this in mind, X-650 is new range of device of seasonic, you can go for it.
    Last edited by lorenz; 28-12-2009 at 10:47 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. How is 4Ghz Ivy Bridge i3 in compare to the AMD Bulldozer 4Ghz
    By Ramiah in forum Motherboard Processor & RAM
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-04-2012, 05:45 AM
  2. Bad performance with Seasonic PSU
    By prem11 in forum Hardware Peripherals
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-08-2011, 10:25 PM
  3. Bad services by Seasonic
    By Paheli in forum Hardware Peripherals
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 30-04-2011, 10:42 PM
  4. Seasonic or Corsair HX M?
    By Gian in forum Motherboard Processor & RAM
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23-05-2009, 12:10 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Page generated in 1,714,245,574.18336 seconds with 17 queries