I have never damaged a CPU by overclocking it. I had a Celeron 366 running
at 550 for years and still have Duron 750 running at 933. They were $50
marvels just like the T'bred XP1700 is today. No fancy HSF needed either,
just a good $10 one.
Stability is the major pitfall. If you can convert a DVD movie to SVCDs in
the summer time then you are pretty damn stable. That runs the CPU at 100%
for 6 hours or so and really stresses memory.
In any event, as long as you can choose a mutiplier you can always drop MHz
down a bit to achieve stabilty, something you could not do with the old
locked Celerons.
"JK" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I don't recommend that people overclock, especially by such large margins.
> If you do this and destroy your cpu, don't expect to get a free
replacement.
> Also don't post here that you are angry that your AMD processor was
> destroyed.
>
>
> rAD wrote:
>
> > "Andre_Mc" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:Xns93B4B69D8A952boysoprano@204.127.199.17...
> > > I recall a few months ago there was a discussion about the pros and
cons
> > of
> > > the Barton v Thoroughbred processor. Do I remember correctly that the
> > > Barton is slower than the the Thbd even tho it runs at 333?
> >
> > T'breds will run at 333(166) too. The CPU doesn't care about bus speed,
only
> > final MHz.
> >
> > Get a T'bred XP1700 for $50 and run it at 2GHz+
> >
> > The mutipliers on them are unlocked below 12.5x so you could run it at
> > 200x10 too. What fun.
>
>
|
Similar Threads
