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>