to clarify, we know that we can get an x2 3800+ and o/c to 2.4-2.5ghz easy, with some 50-60 dollar motherboard.
now for the 1.83ghz conroes, how high do you expect to o/c these? let's just say, oh, i dunno... that we'd expect to get 2.6ghz out of these, easy (just the potential of the processor).
so now, that would require a motherboard to o/c from 7 x 266 to 7 x 370 (around 2.6ghz). are these cheap motherboards going to reach that high of a fsb? what's the cheapest motherboard you can get that'll reach that high? everyone keeps saying the gigabyte 965, but that's around 150, but that'll go 400+ fsb. so you're paying more for some kick ass performance (and if i had the $$$, i'd buy it in a heartbeat (but i'd probably get the e6600 instead))
but that's not the point, right?
now, if we were to compare the x2 3800+ o/c performance, let's assume that a 2.5ghz amd = oh.. uh.. i dunno.. 2.25ghz e6300?
so now that's 7 x 330.. can these cheap motherboards o/c to at least this? if so, then great!
i'm just trying to get the perspective from all around.. people should know (well, i dont post a lot) that i am a "best price/performance ratio" fanboy, so i'm just looking out for what's feasible!
technically, this is pertaining to the lowest end of the dual core battle (i will not consider the Netburst architecture in this debate)
if i had just a little bit more $$$, i'd take conroe in a heartbeat, but now is not the time to spend
edit: as Zap has said in another thread, the e4300 is a 9 x 200 part. if you can take, say that asrock mobo (yeah Duvie, i know... i had the older rev. for the 820 last year), and pump it to 9 x 266 (remember, no vcore adjust), then you'd have yourself a e6700. WINNAR!?