[svlug] Best value Quad core sweet spot, holiday sales, processor mboard overclock retailers
lordsauronthegreat at gmail.com
Wed Nov 26 12:03:11 PST 2008
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:59 AM, Mark S Bilk <mark at cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> Overclocking is a bad idea. Chips are specified with a particular
> clock rate because above that rate errors and/or chip damage may
> occur. The same goes for using a power voltage beyond the spec.
> And since the increase in speed is barely noticeable, there really
> isn't any reason to do it.
There are a few chips (the Intel Core 2 Duo Extreme Editions) which
are shipped with an unlocked clock multiplier. Depending on the
hardware, you can get away with a significant amount of overclocking.
I've heard of gamers overclocking a 3.2 GhZ chip to 4.00 GhZ with
reasonable levels of success (given that they have a freakishly
massive fan attached to their new heat engine, otherwise they
experience what I like to call Microchernobyl syndrome).
I wouldn't recommend it per the capacity for memory timing errors.
When a gamer's machine randomly reboots (al la memory timing error due
to overclocking) it's a stream of cuss words and otherwise the world
keeps on turning. In my experience Linux users place a much higher
premium on stability. Having your system randomly quit does not seem
like it would endear itself to the Linux-user's mindset.
> As to quad core, my dual core system very rarely uses the second
> core (as shown by ksysguard). I'd be interested in reports from
> others on this point.
I have noticed that Windows better spreads single-process jobs across
the cores better on my dual-core, but I haven't paid too much
attention to notice.
> I've always used ASUS motherboards and found them very reliable.
I've had large amounts of success with ECS Elitegroup boards. ATM I'm
using an Abit board with great success. Of course the layout kind of
sucks... bought this beastly NVIDIA GeForce 9800GTX+ to drive my
visual needs, and it covers three of six SATA300 ports! What's up
with that! If I got another for SLI, I'd have no more SATA ports to
> total government censorship of the Internet. Intel has also
> engaged in dishonest and coercive business practices against AMD.
They did, but now they're beating the hell out of my poor AMD in a
more or less fair fight.
AMD still has one trick up their sleeve: their chips are hundreds of
dollars cheaper, and still deliver within ~17% or so of their Intel
counterpart's performance. That's a hundred dollars or more you could
donate to free software or get yourself a bigger hard drive or more
RAM or mail it off to Microsoft for no apparent reason. ;-)
Registered Linux Addict #431495
http://profile.xfire.com/mrstalinman | John 3:16!
http://www.fsdev.net/ | http://lordsauron.wordpress.com/
More information about the svlug