I currently have a Mobile DualCore Intel Merom, 2133 MHz.
I was doing a bit of overclocking and have the CPU at 2425MHz right now. This is probably a dumb question, but is that 2425 x 2 because it's dual core? :unsure:
Printable View
I currently have a Mobile DualCore Intel Merom, 2133 MHz.
I was doing a bit of overclocking and have the CPU at 2425MHz right now. This is probably a dumb question, but is that 2425 x 2 because it's dual core? :unsure:
*ahem*
doubtful. but then again idk for i've never had a dual core.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skizo
Technically, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skizo
You could however adopt AMD's naming conventions and claim it's equivalent to a 4.85GHz single-core chip.
I'm pretty sure it isn't but that never stopped AMD so why let it bother you?
AMD really claimed that? I didn't think they were that arrogant.Quote:
Originally Posted by clockerTechnically, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skizo
You could however adopt AMD's naming conventions and claim it's equivalent to a 4.85GHz single-core chip.
I'm pretty sure it isn't but that never stopped AMD so why let it bother you?
No, they didn't claim that. They simply let people assume that was the case following on from their earlier naming convention.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiranai_BakaAMD really claimed that? I didn't think they were that arrogant.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
So they were no more arrogant than Intel were in claiming that their processors were better because they used a high clock speed.