From owner-freebsd-isp Sat Nov 16 10:25:00 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA11123 for isp-outgoing; Sat, 16 Nov 1996 10:25:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from intrastar.net (root@INTRASTAR.NET [206.136.25.12]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA11118 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 1996 10:24:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from fixed.intrastar.net (jakes@earthstar.net [206.136.25.130]) by intrastar.net (8.8.2/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA09929; Sat, 16 Nov 1996 11:58:07 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199611161758.LAA09929@intrastar.net> From: "Jacob Suter" To: "dennis" Cc: Subject: Re: Router Purchase - the bottom line Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 12:22:22 -0600 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > This is really funny! We're talking about systems stability, overheating, etc > and your running your processor 20% out of spec. Talk about bad moves... > Note that running your processor over spec is not highly recommended to > ISPs who are concerned about long-term stabilty. According to what I have read, this chip was designed to actually run 160, but they didn't want it to compete with the more expensive K5/6x86/P5 chips. So, they marketed it as the cooler 133 solution (which is only P66-P75ish speed).. I don't know what bug crawled in your ass lately, but its really beginning to be annoying. JS