An exclusive gaming industry community targeted
to, and designed for Professionals, Businesses
and Students in the sectors and industries
of Gaming, New Media and the Web, all closely
related with it's Business and Industry.
A Rich content driven service including articles,
contributed discussion, news, reviews, networking, downloads,
and debate.
We strive to cater for cultural influencers,
technology decision makers, early adopters and business leaders in the gaming industry.
A medium to share your or contribute your ideas,
experiences, questions and point of view or network
with other colleagues here at iVirtua Community.
LoL i used both i can tell you AMD always did win on over clocking. by the way i desided on FSB 239 Vcore 1.65 ram volts 1.8 2.62 Ghz stable with temps at 37c to 52 c air cool only.
The Heat Can Cause Intel's P4 To Throttle And Damage Over Time. I didn't know that Intel was having that much problems with heat. I guess they are not good OC'ers. :)
Actually SuperXP, Intel's are better overclockers than AMD's. Why do you think P4's can reach speeds of up to 6.0GHz OC while an FX-55 can only get up to 3.6?
Intel's processors can actually get a higher OC, but the heat problem in the *Prescott* messes everything up, and people now realize that clock speed is nothing.
Contributed by Predator, Guest 510 iVirtua Loyalty Points • • • Back to Top
not true dude. Most i was able to push out of a 3.2E was 3.9 GHz after 2 days it started to show signs of failing. That was on watercooling and temps around 40c to 55c max. Abit Ic7 max 2 board. At 3.9 GHz the graghics quality suffers kinda bad. I had tried the 3.4 E for a day same problem. You see intel lock everything down on the board. all you can do is up the FSB jack the core jack the ram jack the agp and hope for the best. with AMD its all unlocked you can pick the over clock based on what works for long term. Also keep in mind raw speed is not power. More MHz dose not mean more over all speed.
Actually SuperXP, Intel's are better overclockers than AMD's. Why do you think P4's can reach speeds of up to 6.0GHz OC while an FX-55 can only get up to 3.6?
Intel's processors can actually get a higher OC, but the heat problem in the *Prescott* messes everything up, and people now realize that clock speed is nothing.
Getting a 500MHz OC with an Athlon 64 is worth more in performance than a Intel P4 w/ a 1500MHz OC.
Hence this is why we have a 2.60Ghz Athlon 64 beating a P4 3.80GHz in 90% benchmarks. B)
An Athlon 64 3500+ OC'ed to 2.60GHz with a HTT adjustment will not outperform an Athlon 64 3500+ OC'ed to 2.60GHz with the Multiplier adjustment.
The Integrated Memory Controller runs @ CPU Core Frequency, so for some reason it becomes affected when you increase the HTT. That is obviously a good thing, but you will yield better performance with the Multi.
I'll look for a link which can explaing this better. :)
Last edited by Super XP on Sat Jan 22, 2005 12:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
Digg Topic
Tag topic on On del.icio.us
Technorati Search
Post to Slashdot
