Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 14:43:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com> To: lickyou@ein-hashofet.co.il, toasty@home.dragondata.com Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, jkh@time.cdrom.com, phk@critter.freebsd.dk, steve@visint.co.uk Subject: Re: ps segfaults since I overclocked. and worries. Message-ID: <199804102143.OAA06116@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Well, to the best of my knowledge, the p166 and p200 were almost > identical except the fact that intel test these prior to shipment, to > make sure what processor can achieve what clock speed without burning. > I think overclocking is a 99% fail-proof way to achieve better > performance from your CPU(To a limited extent, ofcourse) without > paying more money for something which is about the same. Let me make sure I got this right. 1. Intel makes chip. 2. Intel tests chip at 200 MHz; it fails. 3. Intel tests chip at 166 MHz; it works. 4. Intel sells chip as a P166. 5. Customer buys this P166. 6. Customer overclocks chip to 200 MHz. 7. Customer experiences failures. 8. Customer gripes to FreeBSD mailing lists about "inherent limits" in FreeBSD. Jim Shankland Flying Fox Computer Systems, Inc. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199804102143.OAA06116>