At 01:04 AM 29/09/2005, Greg Sevart wrote:
isn't. Sure, they ultimately don't care if an end user can only hit 2.3GHz
or 2.7GHz, but overclocking is a very valid metric of design/process headroom.
Besides, a chip can still suck if it sucks for end users (even if only a
segment of end users). :)
While I agree that the more headroom the better with a CPU, if it's stable
at the rated speed you can't complain that sucks. OCing means you are
getting something for nothing - the manufacturer doesn't owe you that. If
you buy a dozen donuts, you don't to to complain that if it isn't a baker's
dozen.
And given that the AMD 64 CPU have all had an easy 10% stable OC (every one
I've tested anyway) and Intel has only managed on average a stable 5%-7%
stable OC during that time period, AMD's CPU are far better than the
alternatives.
T
