why would u say a 2000 is slow? hows the coolign in ur current system? i dont think that if you thinkg the 2000+ is slow, a 200mhz increase is gonna be any different.
Printable View
why would u say a 2000 is slow? hows the coolign in ur current system? i dont think that if you thinkg the 2000+ is slow, a 200mhz increase is gonna be any different.
how did u break the core? :huh:
putting my heatsink back on :angry: :angry: :angry:Quote:
Originally posted by Weedy@5 February 2004 - 18:41
how did u break the core? :huh:
i thut that was it, i dont under stand how u can do that. usually my screw driver splips, and goes straight into the mobo, alredy kill 2 that way :lol:
well theres the tiniest amount of damage to the cpu, when i say tiny i mean tiny! well i had it checked over by my local pc shop - they said the same thing, so here i am with a (very cool!) 1900+ (running at 1728mhz - 22c!)Quote:
Originally posted by Weedy@5 February 2004 - 19:04
i thut that was it, i dont under stand how u can do that. usually my screw driver splips, and goes straight into the mobo, alredy kill 2 that way :lol:
wow, i got a athlon 1ghz, ocd to 1150, and damn... 56c
The 1800's (dont know which core) were actually 2600+ re-labelled thats why they could be clocked so high.Quote:
Originally posted by lynx@5 February 2004 - 03:46
The Thoroughbred core doesn't seem to like being clocked to an FSB above about 140 (or the Palomino for that matter), although I understand some of the 1800XP's were an exception.
I have a 2000+ and its not significantly overclockable and certainly not worth the effort.
thanks. seems like ppl are with the idea that its not worth OCing, and that also ther wont be much difference.Quote:
I have a 2000+ and its not significantly overclockable and certainly not worth the effort.
ok :P thanks. i wont OC it.