Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Computer Learning -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RJL who wrote (4690)	7/25/1999 7:44:00 AM
From: wily	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110648

Hey Richard, What's the low-down on wattage requirements for dual systems. I read somewhere that you need 300W. Doesn't it depend on how stuffed your case is with other stuff, or is there some kind of extra stress placed by the second cpu? w

To: RJL who wrote (4690)	7/26/1999 5:41:00 PM
From: wily	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 110648

>>Warmer L2 cache? Haven't really heard of it being an issue unless you're overclocking.<< When the celerons first came out with the on-die cache that was supposed to be a plus: that the level 2 cache was being cooled with the cpu. Guess it got stuck in my brain. How hot do the Xeons run and what is too hot for a cpu? My 366's go up to 125F. Do you know why the Xeons run so hot? They have the on-die level 2 cache, right? >>ECC is a waste of time<< Sean and others on the Dream thread would disagree. They see a difference (none vs some) in the number of hangs on their NT systems which they leave running continuously. Is there any disadvantage to ECC besides the price? >>Good point. Many people that go up to 133Mhz or 124 forget about the PCI bus speed. Don't mess with it, or you'll be able to smell that nice new card you just bought smoking. Apart from frying the CPU, the biggest thing is the motherboard that gets fried. The parts on the board are simply not made for overclocking, regardless of what the manufacturer says. You might only be changing the bus speed, or maybe the multiplier, and even if you change the voltage for the CPU, the heat, and voltage going through those parts can fry stuff.<< I think the thing with the celeron 300A's@450 was that Intel had perfected their .25 micron process and the cores were just THAT good, but they didn't want to hurt sales of their premium lines by selling the celerons at faster speeds. The better 300's ran VERY stable and cool at 450. All the busses were in spec at that speed. This is all hearsay since I haven't run an overclocked system before this one, so I could very easily be wrong! Thanks for the suggestions on scsi and memory. They seem like good guidelenes and I'm always glad to have your input. w