Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 12:23:23 +0200 From: Karel Rous <admin@gyrec.cz> To: Mark Powell <M.S.Powell@salford.ac.uk> Cc: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Need motherboard for home fileserver Message-ID: <471F1D1B.4090007@gyrec.cz> In-Reply-To: <20071023214838.P57575@rust.salford.ac.uk> References: <20071002164246.GA986@hades.panopticon> <20071003003329.GA78359@hades.panopticon> <20071023214838.P57575@rust.salford.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030207070707010300020109
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mark Powell wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
>
> Intel CPU Pentium DualCore E2140
>
> They are similar price to the cheapest AMD and are really just a
> Core2Duo with just 1MB cache and offical 800MHz FSB. However, they are
> the same silicon as C2D. As such these run easily at ~3GHz with
> 350-400MHz FSB all with no voltage increases, if you're into such things.
> It's a shame AMD have fallen behind Intel. Corporate crime does pay
> it seems :(
Personally I don't see any evidence about this statement in low
price solution. I use AMD for a long time and it has never as
overclockable as Intel. The first one I have found is A64 3000 which I
bought two weeks ago...
>
>>
>> Though Core 2 Duo CPUs are more expensive,
>
> See above. Possibly not as low power as an AMD solution, but a lot
> more for your money, me thinks.
I think overclocking shoudn't be understood as a feature you pay
for. It's mainly a matter of luck. Reliability (probability of crash)
and lifetime of such machines could be worse.
Karel
--------------030207070707010300020109--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?471F1D1B.4090007>