On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 13:39 +0200, Michal Varga wrote:
quoted text
> On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 12:23 +0200, Karel Rous wrote:
> > Mark Powell wrote:
> > > On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> > >
> > > Intel CPU Pentium DualCore E2140
> > >
> > > They are similar price to the cheapest AMD and are really just a=20
> > > Core2Duo with just 1MB cache and offical 800MHz FSB. However, they ar=
e=20
quoted text
> > > the same silicon as C2D. As such these run easily at ~3GHz with=20
> > > 350-400MHz FSB all with no voltage increases, if you're into such thi=
ngs.
quoted text
> > >   It's a shame AMD have fallen behind Intel. Corporate crime does pay=
=20
quoted text
> > > it seems :(
> >     Personally I don't see any evidence about this statement in low=20
> > price solution. I use AMD for a long time and it has never as=20
> > overclockable as Intel. The first one I have found is A64 3000 which I=20
> > bought two weeks ago...
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Though Core 2 Duo CPUs are more expensive,
> > >
> > > See above. Possibly not as low power as an AMD solution, but a lot=20
> > > more for your money, me thinks.
> >     I think overclocking shoudn't be understood as a feature you pay=20
> > for. It's mainly a matter of luck. Reliability (probability of crash)=20
> > and lifetime of such machines could be worse.
> >=20
> > Karel
> >=20
> When someone asks me for differences between Core 2 and AMD/64/FX/etc, I
> wont bother to argue anymore, I simply link this:
> http://marc.info/?l=3Dopenbsd-misc&m=3D118296441702631
>=20
> ..and let them decide on their own. (well, maybe I sometimes add that
> buying C2D today is a suicide, but *that* is a highly personal opinion).
>=20
>=20
> m.
>=20

Sigh. Yes, lets all be scared by Theo de Raadt's scaremongering and over
exaggeration. See the original thread on current@ for full explanations
of why everything he says in that email is largely irrelevant.

Tom