Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 08:31:59 09/06/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 1999 at 08:03:06, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: >Ed I would rather avoid any overclocked machine, on the contrary, if stability >is an issue I would underclock them! Which is the same as overprotection in >chess :-) > >I see your tests on the CPU comparison page of your site, and I agree that >faster clocks allow for faster solution on the quiz, but how much real >difference does the clock do in actual play? I dont think it is worth to risk >when a stable CPU (say an K6-3 450) can be used with much lower risk, and >minimal playing difference. > >Of course it is easy to talk after the fault of the machine, but I must admit I >was never seriously convinced by any overclocking. Why would anybody know better >then Intel/AMD themselvs what to do of the CPU they produce and test? Hi Franz, It's not clear at all that over-clocking was the real reason of all the troubles. Any PC can break over-clocked or not. But that all doesn't mean I will not change policy concerning over-clocking. Ed Schroder >regards >Franz
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.