Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 15:30:22 02/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2003 at 18:23:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 20, 2003 at 16:46:50, Aaron Gordon wrote: > >>On February 20, 2003 at 15:01:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>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. >>> >>> >>>You are _completely_ missing the point. We are talking about overclocking the >>>_high_end_ chips. Not the low-end. The fastest production intel chips are >>>3.06ghz. >>>I don't give a squat about overclocking the 2.4ghz processors. We are talking >>>about >>>the _top_ end. >>> >>>This is about taking the best and overclocking, not about taking something that >>>was >>>intentionally marked low simply to fill a market niche request... >> >>I was referring to those as well. An AIUHB 0301 is an AIUHB 0301, whether it's >>on a 2800+ or 1700+. These will do 2.3Ghz MINIMUM which means AMD is producing >>at the very least 2.3GHz silicon. Same goes for Intel, the absolute MINIMUM >>you'll get off a P4-3.06 is 3.2GHz. I consider these the absolute upper limits >>for those chips, any more and you really are overclocking. >> > >No, the absolute minimum you will get from a 3.06ghz pentium IV is 3.06 ghz. If >you >want to go beyond what _really_ bright engineers say works reliably, feel free >to do so, >but you won't convince me that just because it works for the tests you run it >will work for >my mission-critical applications. I leave _that_ to the Intel engineers, they >will tell me when >they have a 3.2ghz chip that is _reliable_ at 3.2ghz, because they will produce >one and sell >it. When Intel releases the 3.2GHz P4, suddenly the limit is raised over the current 3.06GHz. Do you think that somehow they magically are able to do this? Or perhaps the simpler explanation applies. Namely, that the limit never was 3.06GHz in the first place. The core is the SAME. All gate delays are the SAME. But your words seem to imply that you think it's impossible for them to raise the speed to 3.2GHz...so, please explain. I can tell you the reason Intel hasn't released 3.2GHz processors, or 3.4GHz processors (which are both planned to be released, using the same core/process/etc. as the current 3GHz ones). If they released the faster processors earlier, they'd lose all the sales on the intervening speed grades. It doesn't make good business sense to release a 4GHz chip today, so they don't do it.
This page took 0.02 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.