Differences between quad core and faster dual core?

[John Doe]

Overclocking is only dangerous if you push the vcore too high
(running it too hot). It's not dangerous at all if you take the
time and research what you are doing.

It's really only dangerous in your head if you imagine what you are
doing is very important. It probably isn't. For the same reason,
any speed improvement makes little difference. Faster CPUs usually
come with other features that make them faster. If I couldn't afford
enough CPU power and I wanted a little bit more speed to play the
latest games a little less choppy, I might overclock. Even if you
don't believe overclocking damages a processor, be prepared to lie
if/when you sell it.

 

[Shadow36]

It's really only dangerous in your head if you imagine what you are
doing is very important. It probably isn't.

It's unfortunate this newsgroup has to deal with the ramblings that go on in
YOUR head.

For the same reason,
any speed improvement makes little difference.

Are you are still using Pentium 60? Or maybe even a 486 since faster speeds
make no difference?

Faster CPUs usually
come with other features that make them faster. If I couldn't afford
enough CPU power and I wanted a little bit more speed to play the
latest games a little less choppy, I might overclock. Even if you
don't believe overclocking damages a processor, be prepared to lie
if/when you sell it.

I wouldn't lie. I wouldn't need to. I don't push the vcore higher than than
the max according to Intel. My temp isn't even close to being dangerous. My
chip isn't being degraded anymore than a stock chip runnign at 3.0 Ghz.
It's funny how you berate overclockers on this forum as if we are stupid or
aren't getting any real benefit from doing it. Can you honestly tell me that
overclocking from 2.13 ghz to 3.0 Ghz offers no improvement? And if not,
does going from 2.13 to a stock 3.0 chip make no difference.

 

[John Doe]

"John Doe" <jdoe usenetlove.invalid> wrote in message

It's unfortunate this newsgroup has to deal with the ramblings
that go on in YOUR head.

We have to deal with lots of things, including silly overclockers
who think they are on the cutting edge of technology because they
know how to go into the BIOS and flip a switch or two.

Are you are still using Pentium 60?

As of today, I'm using an E6850.

Or maybe even a 486 since faster speeds make no difference?

I guess you don't read very well/much. As follows, I said faster
CPUs usually include other things besides a faster clock.
Increasing the clock speed doesn't do much compared to buying a
current CPU.

I wouldn't lie. I wouldn't need to.

Bullshit liar.

My chip isn't being degraded anymore than a stock chip runnign at
3.0 Ghz.

Says who?

It's funny how you berate overclockers on this forum as if we are
stupid

Every time I hear someone refer to a USENET group as a forum, I get
the feeling they aren't from here, like they started out on website
forums. There are better groups to discuss what you think are the
fine points of overclocking. As I said (in a nutshell), if I
couldn't afford to buy a CPU that runs what I need to run, I would
consider overclocking if I wasn't concerned about having to lie when
I resell the thing.

 

[Shadow36]

Hey Shadow, don't worry about him as he clearly hasn't a clue. He has
completely avoided answering the question below that I put directly to him
elsewhere in this thread. I think he's lost for words due to not having a
convincing answer!

You are right, I'm not going to worry about him. I think he couldn't figure
out how to overclock, so he bashes anyone here that talks about it.

 

[John Doe]

He has completely avoided answering the question below that I put
directly to him elsewhere in this thread. I think he's lost for
words due to not having a convincing answer!

You have avoided several of my points and direct questions.

I don't need to overclock anything, my CPU is fast enough
for my applications.

You are just a troll.

You need to get a life.