Athlon 64 vs Pentium 4

[Noozer]

Also, why can't you compare gas mileage in the Civic gas to the Civic

Ok, maybe that was a bad example, but why compare something that shouldn't
be compared that way? Of course 64 bit is going to be better than 32 bit.
Maybe it's like comparing a screwdriver to a cordless drill?

Because they both do the same job. If the 64bit works better and costs the
same, why would you get the 32bit?

....and have you ever had a cordless drill, dead battery and noplace to plug
in? That 49 cent screwdriver is sure worth a lot more at that point!

 

[~misfit~]

No. OCing a CPU is like taking a STOCK car and never running the
engine BELOW redline. You are doing something with the car that it
was not designed to do. And yes, it will be fast, until the engine
and all other mechanical components give out on you. THAT is what
OCing a CPU is, exactly. -Dave

Interesting theory. Let's follow it through:

If I did that with a car, set the idle speed to red-line and only went above
it, it would last, what, a half-day? At the most. (Don't try this at home
folks!) Let's say for argument's sake that the car was built for a 10 year
lifespan. It died in one 7,300th of that time. So you're saying that my
Celeron 600's that have been running at 900 for four years, if they died
tomorrow, would have lasted 29,200 years if I'd ran them at stock speed?

I bet they'd be really useful in 29,200 years huh? If they were only running
at 600 now I'd have binned them already as they wouldn't be fast enough for
the task they are doing. Same with my XP1800+ (1.53Ghz stock) that is
running at 2.1Ghz on a 200Mhz FSB. If it wasn't OC'ed I would have replaced
it. Therefore overclocked CPU's last longer.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

No. OCing a CPU is like taking a STOCK car and never running the
engine BELOW redline. You are doing something with the car that
it was not designed to do. And yes, it will be fast, until the
engine and all other mechanical components give out on you. THAT
is what OCing a CPU is, exactly. -Dave

It depends on your objectives. Mine is reliability and data
integrity, with a loud and instantaneous complaint when any error
occurs. For people who don't care about that, and really just
want to play games, overclocking may be a fairly cheap way of
improving performance. Meanwhile I recommend none of it, ECC,
languages with strong typing and error detection, open-source
programs, etc.

 

[Chris Stolworthy]

<BIG SNIP>
Lol dude I just bought a P4 2.8E. I could have forked out the extra cash
for the 3.2, the only difference? They are actually the same EXACT
processor die. The only difference is that when they are manufactured at
the factory, whatever part of the CPU that does the reporting to the board
is different so it reports it to set as a 3.2. So OC'ing a 2.8e to a 3.2 is
actually only setting the chip to what it was originally set to do in the
first place! I don't have to up my core voltage, just my FSB settings.
Funny how that works huh? Like my video card as well, an ATI X800 Pro ViVO
Sapphire. It is actually the same chip that is in the X800XT, they just
didn't connect the extra 4 pipelines. They are there, they just didn't
connect them in the manufacturering process. So I get the card, pop off the
Heatsink, using a conductive pen I connect the extra 4 pipelinesand
suddenly, BAM I have gone from a X800 Pro to an X800XT. 12 pipelines to 16.
Running at what the chip WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED TO DO! Most lower end
hardware these days is just higher end hardware that has not had the "extra"
stuff that makes it so, connected. So OC'ing my stuff actually on got it to
run at what it was originally designed for. Funny how that works isn't it?

-Chris