- Jun 3, 2005
- 1,080
- 0
- 0
Well, I've nearly completed my "Pet project" so to speak, and have compiled a pretty detailed report on the OC performance of a few of the 939 Opterons. Specifically, it deals with the 144/146/148/165 models.
You can check it out here:
OC Results Page
A few points:
1.) We gathered information from a lot of places, many of which were forums. There is a chance that if you have posted OC results, we used them for this page. I never reveal sources or anything, but if you want to know if your data was used, or if you'd like to make sure yours is not, just shoot me a PM or reply to this thread. I don't want to infringe on your personal rights or anything, but having to contact the hundreds of people for permission would have taken an eternity.
2.) Results are most definitely NOT scientific.
Interesting Info:
1 - The 144 has the best PERCENTAGE of overclock, across the board.
2 - Water cooling made a BIG difference for 144's, but almost nothing for 146/148/165's
3 - 146's and 148's tend to overclock about the same. Unless your board can't push reasonably high HTT values, save your money and go with a 146.
4 - 165's have the worst overclocking performance. Likely because of the "weakest core" rule, and due to imperfections in the IHS seating. I'd also wager that having double the heat output throws a wrench in the works... but then again, average temperatures for the 165's were significantly higher than the single core processors.
If any of you have any questions/comments/feedback, definitely let me know. I'm trying to get more info, or feedback from various sources so that I can tailor this as needed. Right now, I haven't broken it down by Core/Week, because I don't have enough data to reasonably do so... so averages will have to suffice for now.
You can check it out here:
OC Results Page
A few points:
1.) We gathered information from a lot of places, many of which were forums. There is a chance that if you have posted OC results, we used them for this page. I never reveal sources or anything, but if you want to know if your data was used, or if you'd like to make sure yours is not, just shoot me a PM or reply to this thread. I don't want to infringe on your personal rights or anything, but having to contact the hundreds of people for permission would have taken an eternity.
2.) Results are most definitely NOT scientific.
Interesting Info:
1 - The 144 has the best PERCENTAGE of overclock, across the board.
2 - Water cooling made a BIG difference for 144's, but almost nothing for 146/148/165's
3 - 146's and 148's tend to overclock about the same. Unless your board can't push reasonably high HTT values, save your money and go with a 146.
4 - 165's have the worst overclocking performance. Likely because of the "weakest core" rule, and due to imperfections in the IHS seating. I'd also wager that having double the heat output throws a wrench in the works... but then again, average temperatures for the 165's were significantly higher than the single core processors.
If any of you have any questions/comments/feedback, definitely let me know. I'm trying to get more info, or feedback from various sources so that I can tailor this as needed. Right now, I haven't broken it down by Core/Week, because I don't have enough data to reasonably do so... so averages will have to suffice for now.
would like to see how other dual core opterons, maybe X2s later stack up.
Facebook
Twitter