My old VS my new PC

[madness 3D]

you changed the FSB
the stock is 200mhz
it goes through a 10 times multiplier which is set by AMD
you get a clock speed of 2000mhz.

By increasing the FSB to 220mhz you get a speed of 2200Mhz.
(220 * 10 = 2200) der

Core 2's can overclock loads on stock cooling but
as an an AMD fanboy i must beg you

Stick with AMD!!!
get an AM2 board and an X2

Then when the new range of AMD's come out
You can get some real power
And Experience the Phenominal

Such a shame if you missed out and bought a Core 2...

[xeon_1]

also make sure when you overclock that your ht speed does not go above 1000mhz
so if you overclock put the ht multiplyer on 4

[CBJ]

I dont want to buy extra cooling and stuff...

You've asked at least 3 times whether you need extra cooling to overclock a Core 2 Duo, and each time you've had an answer that indicates that you don't, provided you don't push it too far.

Stick with AMD!!!
get an AM2 board and an X2

Then when the new range of AMD's come out
You can get some real power
And Experience the Phenominal

Such a shame if you missed out and bought a Core 2...

Would you care to point us in the direction of some independent benchmarks that confirm that the new AMD chips will be so much faster than the current Core 2 Duo chips? Or are you basing your statement that the OP "missed out" based purely on AMD's hype, which given the rather disappointing performance of their recent graphics card offerings should, I think, be taken with a pinch of salt?

[xeon_1]

The core duo is 64bit
But you shouldn't compare clockspeed of amd to intel since they do not compare to eachother

my cpu can run max on 2640mhz with my current cooling and i can only just keep up with a e6600 at 2200mhz
so comparing intel to amd clockspeeds is pointless you need to look up reviews for a comparison

[madness 3D]

I dont want to buy extra cooling and stuff...

You've asked at least 3 times whether you need extra cooling to overclock a Core 2 Duo, and each time you've had an answer that indicates that you don't, provided you don't push it too far.

Stick with AMD!!!
get an AM2 board and an X2

Then when the new range of AMD's come out
You can get some real power
And Experience the Phenominal

Such a shame if you missed out and bought a Core 2...

Would you care to point us in the direction of some independent benchmarks that confirm that the new AMD chips will be so much faster than the current Core 2 Duo chips? Or are you basing your statement that the OP "missed out" based purely on AMD's hype, which given the rather disappointing performance of their recent graphics card offerings should, I think, be taken with a pinch of salt?

Erm... I'm being optimistic

Amd have realised their proposed plan was naff so they may delay the Phenom range till 2008. To make it more competitive to the Penryn Architecture.

Amd have the record of coming out on top.
we just have to have faith they'll do so again

Just because Amd accidentally bought Ati doesn't mean it will influence their CPU's in any way

Ref.
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/custompc/news/11 ... -2008.html

[Xkaarj666]

I dont want to buy extra cooling and stuff...

You've asked at least 3 times whether you need extra cooling to overclock a Core 2 Duo, and each time you've had an answer that indicates that you don't, provided you don't push it too far.

Stick with AMD!!!
get an AM2 board and an X2

Then when the new range of AMD's come out
You can get some real power
And Experience the Phenominal

Such a shame if you missed out and bought a Core 2...

Would you care to point us in the direction of some independent benchmarks that confirm that the new AMD chips will be so much faster than the current Core 2 Duo chips? Or are you basing your statement that the OP "missed out" based purely on AMD's hype, which given the rather disappointing performance of their recent graphics card offerings should, I think, be taken with a pinch of salt?

I just dont want to get surprised that i suddenly need cooling.

About core2duo. If u compare the cheaper models of amd and intel of around same price, then the amd is better. but as soon as i overclock the intel, that one should be way better.
thats the information i get from this thread. but is this true how i formulate it?
And if i do overclock the intel, by how much will this reduce the lifetime? i know alot of factors go with this.

[madness 3D]

A decrease in lifetime generally is associated with the heat it runs at

Keep it cool (3rd party cooler cool) and don't worry too much

It should last you till your next upgrade

[CBJ]

Amd have the record of coming out on top.
we just have to have faith they'll do so again

Yes, AMD held the performance and value crown for a while and then failed to respond when Intel took it from them. Why should we "have faith"? Why not just go out and buy whichever kind of chip gives the best value for money? Buying computer components isn't a sport and there's nothing to be gained by having a favourite "team" which you back even when they are losing.

[Xkaarj666]

Amd have the record of coming out on top.
we just have to have faith they'll do so again

Yes, AMD held the performance and value crown for a while and then failed to respond when Intel took it from them. Why should we "have faith"? Why not just go out and buy whichever kind of chip gives the best value for money? Buying computer components isn't a sport and there's nothing to be gained by having a favourite "team" which you back even when they are losing.

I have always used AMD, so im not that confident in intel. Altough with overclocking u get a lot of bang for buck it seems.

I got an other question, does 1 or 2 MB cache in CPU make a big difference in performance and FPS?

[CBJ]

How long is a piece of string? Of course cache can make a difference, just the same as the raw clockspeed can make a difference, but there are so many other factors involved that it is rarely possible to assess the value of one particular feature in isolation. In this case you'd need two otherwise identical processors of the same make, model and even production stepping with two different cache sizes to do so, and since manufacturers don't normally issue chips with everything else the same apart from cache size this can't be done.

Ignore the individual raw numbers and look at the real-life benchmarks published on sites like Tom's Hardware, concentrating on the kinds of application you plan to use your PC for. Look at where you want to be on the performance curve and buy the chip that is closest to that but still within your price range. If you fancy trying your hand at overclocking then you'll also need to look at some overclocking sites and compare the relative overclockability of different hardware to see the chips' full potential.

[Xkaarj666]

How long is a piece of string? Of course cache can make a difference, just the same as the raw clockspeed can make a difference, but there are so many other factors involved that it is rarely possible to assess the value of one particular feature in isolation. In this case you'd need two otherwise identical processors of the same make, model and even production stepping with two different cache sizes to do so, and since manufacturers don't normally issue chips with everything else the same apart from cache size this can't be done.

Ignore the individual raw numbers and look at the real-life benchmarks published on sites like Tom's Hardware, concentrating on the kinds of application you plan to use your PC for. Look at where you want to be on the performance curve and buy the chip that is closest to that but still within your price range. If you fancy trying your hand at overclocking then you'll also need to look at some overclocking sites and compare the relative overclockability of different hardware to see the chips' full potential.

The ones that i want to compare are the e4400(2mb cache) and the e2140(1mb cache) , this one seems to be the best with overclocking. But i cant find any becnhmarks that compare these two, cant find the e2140.

[blacktoe]

How long is a piece of string? Of course cache can make a difference,

L2 cache. There is no substitute. I found this quite clearly when comparing my previous CPU - an Opteron 144 - to a friend's nearly identical machine equipped with a Venice.

The double-sized cache is the reason I went with the E6320 and don't have any doubt it makes a significant difference. I have been a dedicated AMD builder since I bought a Duron 600. If AMD can work their magic again in about a year, maybe I'll switch back.

The ones that i want to compare are the e4400(2mb cache) and the e2140(1mb cache) , this one seems to be the best with overclocking. But i cant find any becnhmarks that compare these two, cant find the e2140.

You will find that not many are bothering with the E4xxx line of CPUs. Instead, most tweakers are going for the E6300 - 6600.