Build The Best PC

i believe him

but it is not for show!
hehee

Here ya go if ya wanna see it *LOL* more than enougn proof

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showth...hreadid=162024

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showth...hreadid=161720

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showth...hreadid=161796

if an athlon tbird 1.2GHz is running at 45C right now
how cool will it be with that tbred 2100 at both stock and OC'ed?

WIll let ya know My 2600+ ran at arond 92F stock and overclocked runs around 99-100F at 1.8v

thats pretty cool
hmm

are u using AC3 or nanotherm?

ac3 always

so its so overclockable
and cheap and sick fast
hmm

gotta get it!

Here ya go if ya wanna see it *LOL* more than enougn proof

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showth...hreadid=162024

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showth...hreadid=161720

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showth...hreadid=161796

Sorry AI, I don't see any proof at all. Until I see some hard benchmarks I would have to disagree with you. Forum posts are not proof enough for me.

AMD's CPU naming convention reflects a similar Intel CPU speed. I.E an AMD 2600+ is equal to an Intel 2.6Ghz CPU. NOT a 3.1Ghz CPU. Even overclocked to equal a 2800+, the 2600+ don't even come close to 3.1Ghz. I think your confusing the added speed of the nForce chipsets and the dual-channel DDR to be an added speed of AMD CPU's. A false assumption IMO. :P

Your compairing apples to oranges. I would bet an exact setup using the same speed memory and chipsets, the Intel 2.8 would out perform the AMD 2600 with ease. Even overclocked the results would be the same because the 2600 can't overclock to equal the speed of an AMD 3000+ (if there is such an animal). It simply wont overclock that high.

I'll even go one step further... If you had an AMD 2800+ overclocked to reflect 3.1Ghz, you would still be at the same compaired speed of an overclocked Intel 2.8Ghz at 3.1Ghz. What the heck, I'll even go out on a limb and assume your correct. You have a 2600 that you say outperforms an Intel 3.1. I have an Intel running at 3.1. Your 3dMark scores are only around 300 points higher than mine. HOWEVER, your basing your conclusions using a 9700 pro. I'm using a 9500 non-pro software modded to a 9700 non-pro. If I were using a 9700 pro overclocked as you, do you think I could make up that 300 points???

I guess that remains to be seen since I don't have a 9700 pro. :P

What do you think?

Hey bub, I underclocked my 9700 pro to the same clocks as yours and with my overclocked 2600+ I was within 300 points.

ALSO! WOHOO! as for proof hehe I am running my 2100+ that I have for sale which is running allot better #'s than posted after figuring it out more at 12x 190fsb. For $95 purchase price it will keep up with a 3.0ghz pent system, not outrun but keep up with hehehe and I will back that anytime! I am still testing the 2100 and pushing it, but making it run 1 hour of 3dse each time I go up a few settings, who knows it may ba as fast or faster than my 2600+ overclocked to I would have to say for a fact that is the best chip for the money available and my word is gold as you know, not some people ina forum posting! I will shoot ya some pics of wcpuid and also my 3dmark score with this baby! Just wanna make sure it is stable first ALso you are correct, I am useing dual channel nforce to make up for my lower bandwidth fsb but you run your ddr at 190x2 and I will run mine at 190x2 on a normal board and compare chips side by side and we will see who wins DOn;t wanna turn this into a flaming match but the b core tbreds are the best bang for the buck in the world right now as long as you get a pre 300 chip.

Oh yeah and just for the record I am running what would be called a amd 3150+ if you were to score it that way So yes they can overclock past the 3000+ mark with ease! I run mine 2600+ at 194fsb max and a mult of 12.5 You do the math Also allot of amd guys on supercooling are running what would be concidered a 4000+ hehehe