 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Johnny Smith <joh### [at] telebot net> wrote:
: Uhhhm, your not going to believe this. But that was done already.
: And yeah, it allowed them to run the chip at outrageous speeds!
: What they did was take something like a 486 or something rediculous...
: (I know it wasn't a pentium) and hook a compressor up to it. They
: somehow surrounded the chip in a casing, then used something like compressed
: ammonia or something to super cool the chip. (if I remember correctly, they
: lowered the
: temperature to something like -30 degrees F ) They were able to (reliably) run
: this
: 486 or whatever it was, at something like 600 mhz. It was a pretty interesting
: article.
I hardly believe this. If a transistor can't change its state any faster,
then it can't.
Don't believe everything you read.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What I DID see, was a computer company that sells super-cooled
computers, not overclocked, and the result was a yet faster chip that
was legal to resell.
That's another aspect of overclocking - it's theft, at least legally.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lewis wrote in message <372CBD02.BA21E368@netvision.net.il>...
>What I DID see, was a computer company that sells super-cooled
>computers, not overclocked, and the result was a yet faster chip that
>was legal to resell.
>
>That's another aspect of overclocking - it's theft, at least legally.
Under which strange legal system would overclocking be theft? Let me guess!
The american! ;-)
No, earnestly, do you have any facts to consolidate your statement?
And I am speaking of private individuals, or even companies, that overclock
CPUs they have themselves bought, for their own use, at their own risk.
I do not mean someone buying lower-rated chips and relabeling them to sell
them as more expensive high-speed chips...
Johannes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lewis wrote:
>
> That's another aspect of overclocking - it's theft, at least legally.
What about the thiefs who sells the SAME chip a different prices, just
to artificially create a low-end and a high-end market ?
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yeah, I don't really see why it's theft... after all, you've bought it...
it's yours to use how you see fit... you could use it as a paper weight if
you wan't (granted, an expensive paper weight)...
You could blow it to bits if you wanted... it's yours, isn't it? For
example, Intel couldn't just come around to your house and tell they want to
use your processor that you bought off them... it's yours, right?
--
Lance.
---
For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
For a totally different experience, visit my Chroma Key Website:
Colorblind - http://listen.to/colorblind
Fabien Mosen <101### [at] compuservecom> wrote in message
<372D36BE.A4B63605@compuserve.com>...
>Lewis wrote:
>>
>> That's another aspect of overclocking - it's theft, at least legally.
>
>What about the thiefs who sells the SAME chip a different prices, just
>to artificially create a low-end and a high-end market ?
>
>Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think you misunderstood the article. Cooling per se does not increase the
speed of a chip. Indeed, at least one company sells computers with
super-cooled processors (AMD K-3). And these processors _are_ oveclocked.
This is very different from remarking (which is illegal and cheating). The
company makes it very clear what processor is used and that it is
overclocked, so all is legal. The processor manufacturer will simply not
accept any liability for such a product.
Margus
Lewis wrote:
>
> What I DID see, was a computer company that sells super-cooled
> computers, not overclocked, and the result was a yet faster chip that
> was legal to resell.
>
> That's another aspect of overclocking - it's theft, at least legally.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Not to beat an old dead thread but,
I shaved a little 6 seconds from the skyvase benchmark just by
choosing "load high performance settings" in my BIOS (Ami). From 108 seconds
to 102 it's a 5.5% improvement (1). Nothing dramatic but certainly less
risky than overclocking. My motherboard offers me two settings for the Front
Bus Speed : 66 Mhz for the Celeron 366A that I run or death at 100Mhz unless
I switch to a P II-III.
(1) That's 1h20 odd minutes a day, 20 days 1 hour 48 minutes a year, a
little more than 4 years a lifetime (average male) %<))
JM
>
>
> Was sitting here tonight reading... and considering what I could do
>with a 450 Mhz pentium if I could get my hands on one. (I've been told
>people VERY often drive them 550 and higher Mhz)
>I myself am using a 150 mhz pentium overclocked to 166. I was
>wondering, since RAW cpu cycles are practically EVERYTHING when it
>comes to povray, how many of you are using overclocked machines?
>Just curious.
>
> Johnny
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Instead of over clocking my cpu I upgraded from my lowly 166 Mhz to a
200MMX ( all my mb can hand, new system next year).
I went from 884s to 581s (in normal render, running win 95) even
forgot to turn off screen saver and answering machine.
Brian
--
Southern Cross Akitas (SCA)
Pampa, Tx
http://www.centramedia.com/users/bivolcic
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Brian & Lois Bivolcic wrote:
>
> Instead of over clocking my cpu I upgraded from my lowly 166 Mhz to a
> 200MMX ( all my mb can hand, new system next year).
> I went from 884s to 581s (in normal render, running win 95) even
> forgot to turn off screen saver and answering machine.
> Brian
>
> --
> Southern Cross Akitas (SCA)
> Pampa, Tx
> http://www.centramedia.com/users/bivolcic
I experienced a similar improvement by going from a p166 to the p200mmx
processor architecture. I had read where there was a noticable performance
difference between the two but hadn't expected as much as I actually got
from the upgrade. Got another 4 - 8% by switching from w95 to w98.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 07 May 1999 20:00:39 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>Got another 4 - 8% by switching from w95 to w98.
Have you tried the "98Lite" technique of crippling MSIE so that it
doesn't automatically load upon startup? I think the .url is
http://www.98lite.net
I implemented the simple manual method that allows me to put things
back as originally installed. It takes only minutes to accomplish. I
tried it and it freed significant system resources that could be put
to better use with other applications.
--
Alan
------------------------------------------------------------------
povray.org - official home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
news.povray.org - where POV-Ray enthusiasts from around the world
- get together to exchange ideas and experiences
------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
