• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

.13um Celeron 2GHz oc'ed to 3GHz: barely outperformed the 1.6A @ stock

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: AkumaX
you think its just "fun" why some of us o/cers are buying these .13 2ghz celerons just to o/c to 3.0ghz? yes, the performance isnt all that great, but i guess the number game would make it a little fun:

2.0->3.0 (50% o/c is back... again)
600mhz fsb (150 x 4 sounds nice)
and who wouldnt want a 3.0ghz cpu (bragging rights for the unknowing layperson who just spend $$$$$ on a 2.53+)

i dunno, i think i'd kinda be fun to o/c one of these "babies" only if it were cheaper 😛
Click to expand...


The laughter from the people on the boards would make you double think that 😛 Id be making good ole comments like... another 4Ghz to go before you can play Commache as fast at my 1.8Ghz AMD at 175(350) FSB.
 
If you'd bother to read the review you'd of noticed they disabled the L2 cache to reach 3GHz. Gee, I wonder why it performs like crap...
 
If you'd bother to read the review you'd of noticed they disabled the L2 cache to reach 3GHz. Gee, I wonder why it performs like crap...
Click to expand...

No the rap is well deserved. They didn't disable any cache in tomshardware's reviews and it still performed like a POS being beaten by the 1.6a. Tomshardware isn't exactly pro-amd so I trust them when They say it's a POS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top