Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 11:42:19 02/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2003 at 14:16:12, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On February 20, 2003 at 11:42:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>That is _not_ the same idea. The idea that a vendor purposefully underclocks a >>chip >>is ridiculous. The idea that they don't release the next generation at a faster >>clock rate >>until the current supply of slower chips is exhausted is not contradictory at >>all. Two >>totally different business practices, one of which makes economic sense, the >>other makes >>zero sense. > >They make ALL of the chips off the same line. Why do you think you can run out >and buy an AthlonXP 1700+ (1466MHz) with the Thoroughbred-B core for $56 and >overclock it to 2.1-2.3GHz? Try that with one of the very first 1700+ chips, you >will not get over 1.6GHz. Same thing goes for my old Celeron-2 566MHz. It does >1.1GHz (yes, 566 to 1100) air-cooled. This is a cC0 and basically is a P3-1GHz >core with some L2 cache disabled. Intel and AMD both make the same stuff and >mark it to whatever they feel is needed. If Celeron 566's are selling a lot, >they'll start marking them 566 to meet demand. 2100+'s are selling like >wild-fire, AMD is putting their latest and greatest silicon in those chips. You >can pay $300 or whatever it costs for a 2800+ *OR* you can get a 2100+ with the >*EXACT* same core for $97. > >You may know about programming, Hyatt, but you sure don't know about >overclocking. You sure don't know about the real world where real work is at stake. I'll say this, he is wise enough not to waste his time risking mission critical applications on over-clocked, un-warranteed systems. Hardware failure risks are not something to play around with in the real business world, even at a university. It's one thing if you are a hobbyist, but quite another when you are responsible to your employer for the quality and reliability of the results. Where I work, hardware failures mean potentially MILLIONS OF DOLLARS in lost revenue and penalties. Matt >I've been doing this all my life, I even built a liquid cooler >when I was a kid (I think I was 13-14 years old or so). I mean completely built >from scratch, evaporative radiator and all (the evaporation helps keep the water >below-ambient). All my previous overclocks were 100% stable and infact I've >still got some of those systems still today, chugging along running fine. >Here are a few of my past overclocks: > >Celeron 300a @ 644MHz on an Abit BH6, water cooled + 76 watt peltier >Celeron 366 @ 735MHz on an Abit Bx6-2, water cooled + 76 watt peltier >Celeron 566 @ 1202MHz on an Abit Be6-2, water cooled + 172 watt peltier >Athlon Thunderbird 1.0GHz @ 1.7GHz on an Abit KT7a modified, water cooled >AthlonXP 1900+ (1.6GHz) @ 1.86GHz on an Asus A7V266-E and Epox 8k5a2, water >cooled >AthlonXP 1700+ (1.46GHz) @ 2.15GHz on an Epox 8k5a2, water cooled >AthlonXP 2100+ (1.73GHz) @ 2.5GHz on an Epox 8k5a2, water cooled > >This is just scratching the surface, too. All of these systems were stable, some >I have sold, etc. I still have the Tbird 1ghz and celeron 566, had'em for years >running overclocked. Never had a problem.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.