SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Charles Gryba who wrote (165102)5/14/2002 12:05:56 AM
From: wanna_bmw  Respond to of 186894
 
Constantine, Re: "who do you think is the culprit for the STR failing at 2.3Ghz ?"

Could be anything. While these overclocking motherboards have a lot of headroom in many areas, it's almost impossible to validate around everything. The boot-up process is the most system intensive task that any computer needs to do. It involves heavy configuration accesses, memory and I/O intensive loads, and rarely seen CPU instructions. And of all the areas of a system that things can go wrong, I've seen the most issues with power management features. Frankly, I'm surprised that the STR function works at even the frequency that I'm running, which is 15% above spec, by the way. I think it speaks highly for the level of electrical stability in today's motherboards.

wbmw



To: Charles Gryba who wrote (165102)5/14/2002 3:42:01 AM
From: Joe NYC  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 186894
 
Constantine,

wbmw, who do you think is the culprit for the STR failing at 2.3Ghz ?

I think he said he had 1.8 GHz. So to get to 2.3 GHz, he needs to overclock the FSB and memory by 28%, which can become iffy, even if the CPU is fine. Or it could be the CPU. I think the days of 50% overclock (like the first Celerons) are over.

Joe