Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: overclocking 1200 intel




  1. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    ehh the P4 celerons have only 128Kb L2 cache which is way to low.. That's nowhere near enough for todays modern games..

    Modern P4's have 512Kb.. 128 vs 512 see the difference..?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    848

    Default

    Take note of edit on my above post, had a crisis and had to leave the desk for a while. And I would also say that 128 vs 512= lacking on the part of the 128.
    athlon xp-m@2456mhz(12x204)
    tt aquariusII liquid cooled/ arctic silver ceramique
    asus a7n8xe-dlx
    thermaltake xaserIII lanfire
    bfg 6800gt
    seagate sataII 250gb/seagate 7200rpm 160gb ide
    samsung dvdrw
    2x1024 kingston hyper-x pc3200/ windows xp pro sp3
    logitech mx518/ logitech wingman rumble
    2x samsung 955df 19"/ canon i960
    creative x-fi fatal1ty 64mb/ altec lansing 251-5.1
    mushkin 550w

    opteron 146 @ 2850 (10x285)
    DFI infinity nf4 ultra
    thermaltake tsunami dream -black
    seagate sataII 500gb
    evga 8600gt oc ssc edition
    samsung sata dvd-rw
    2x1024 ocz black
    logitech ifeel/ nec accusync 75f
    ocz fatal1ty 550w

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    ehh the P4 celerons have only 128Kb L2 cache which is way to low.. That's nowhere near enough for todays modern games..

    Modern P4's have 512Kb.. 128 vs 512 see the difference..?
    That was my whole point...what are you trying to say?

    Again, it takes a Celeron 3ghz to equal a P4 1.8a in gaming performance for that very reason.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    848

    Default

    Yes your statement is correct. But of course 512 L2 cache vs 128 L2 cache is a bad comparison. This thread is supposed to be about ocing a 1.2a 256L2 celeron. Which I know lots about. And have never had a crash complaint after 6 of em runnin at 1.6 ghz. If I can inform someone that some of their hardware is not as bad as everyone says, then I have done my job in the grand scheme of things.(I think most of the t.t. regulars would agree) He may not understand that a p4 style celeron was what you refered to. Thus this discussion was geared for him.(the guy that asked for help) We all know that the fx5200 is why he is having problems. You should know, having a fancypants fx5900. You are obviously up on the performance and specs of the fx series. I have no gfx problems at all, all my current (not obsolete games work just fine), but a hellishly oc'ed r9000 pro 128 is also a bad comparison to a stock(bad ocing, probably passively cooled fx5200, the dud of nvidia of late)(for the same $ a radeon 9000pro 128 would make a difference like night and day, as the fx5200 is way too slow to take advantage of anything with dx9)(the only better thing it has).
    athlon xp-m@2456mhz(12x204)
    tt aquariusII liquid cooled/ arctic silver ceramique
    asus a7n8xe-dlx
    thermaltake xaserIII lanfire
    bfg 6800gt
    seagate sataII 250gb/seagate 7200rpm 160gb ide
    samsung dvdrw
    2x1024 kingston hyper-x pc3200/ windows xp pro sp3
    logitech mx518/ logitech wingman rumble
    2x samsung 955df 19"/ canon i960
    creative x-fi fatal1ty 64mb/ altec lansing 251-5.1
    mushkin 550w

    opteron 146 @ 2850 (10x285)
    DFI infinity nf4 ultra
    thermaltake tsunami dream -black
    seagate sataII 500gb
    evga 8600gt oc ssc edition
    samsung sata dvd-rw
    2x1024 ocz black
    logitech ifeel/ nec accusync 75f
    ocz fatal1ty 550w

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    WWOOOOOOOOOHHHH..... PPL PLS!!!!!!!!!!

    I think that ya's are gettin' a bit far aboard here so how about waitin' for TOOTH PIC to reply before ya's get even further adrift here.

  6. #36
    Beefy Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggo
    WWOOOOOOOOOHHHH..... PPL PLS!!!!!!!!!!

    I think that ya's are gettin' a bit far aboard here so how about waitin' for TOOTH PIC to reply before ya's get even further adrift here.
    Seems to be happening a bit lately.. :(

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    Sorry, but Maximus, ATIs rival for the 5200 is the 9200 (not the 9000).

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    848

    Default

    Hmm, I wonder who originally posted this:
    the FX 5200 and R9000 are in the same price range. After all, those 2 cards are trying to capture the same market and are tested head to head on hardware reviews.
    athlon xp-m@2456mhz(12x204)
    tt aquariusII liquid cooled/ arctic silver ceramique
    asus a7n8xe-dlx
    thermaltake xaserIII lanfire
    bfg 6800gt
    seagate sataII 250gb/seagate 7200rpm 160gb ide
    samsung dvdrw
    2x1024 kingston hyper-x pc3200/ windows xp pro sp3
    logitech mx518/ logitech wingman rumble
    2x samsung 955df 19"/ canon i960
    creative x-fi fatal1ty 64mb/ altec lansing 251-5.1
    mushkin 550w

    opteron 146 @ 2850 (10x285)
    DFI infinity nf4 ultra
    thermaltake tsunami dream -black
    seagate sataII 500gb
    evga 8600gt oc ssc edition
    samsung sata dvd-rw
    2x1024 ocz black
    logitech ifeel/ nec accusync 75f
    ocz fatal1ty 550w

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    That isn't a very understandable point, what exactly is playable to you?

    Details and resolution is always the limiting factor, somehow I have a very hard time to belive you can play todays most demanding games in 1600x1200 32Bit and all the details maxed on a 1200Mhz cpu. (no matter cpu architechure or vga hardware) The system requirements that are given on most gaming boxes are sooo fake.. They want to sell more copys that's the reason..

    The games are often barely playable with recommended specs, and the minimum specs is just a joke.. Sure you can turn of all eyecandy and bump the res down to 800x600 but I would never dream of paying money for an experince like that.. :yuc:
    umm, i can play CS- battlefield, warcraft 3, d2, and even matrix on a 1200.

    I dont get y people need the (Top) and the fastest system. I only care if i can play the game, and it wont lag.

    I can even play counter strike with a 533mhz /128mb pc100 ram. so, u dont need to have the uptodate system to play games.
    My new gaming rig..

    [size=1.28]asus a78nx-deluxe
    2x256mb pc 3200 ddr 400.(with cooling)
    athlon Xp 2500+ ( at 200x10=2000mhz .)
    seagate 80gb 8mb SATA
    Tt vlocano 7+ cpu cooling
    Clear case from HK.
    Leaktek fx5600 128mb
    enermax 350w PSU
    wireless internet setup[/size]


    (game/ftp server) windows xp pro, duron 1.4ghz, 256mb pc 2100 2x40gb Hd, radeon 9200se chieftec dragon
    canada price watch :)

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    I know, I posted that before I saw the reviews and realized my mistake.

    They are around the same price though...

    :cheers:

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •