To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
But the nonsense begins, if you're seeing a need in overclocking your hardware.
A few years ago, I bought a motherboard with an AMD Athlon XP 2000+ processor. But, it would not run at 2GHz by default. At the store, employees made it very clear that I would need to change the clock speed from 100 to 133 - and even the box with the CPU mentioned the number 133.
Some people call it getting your money's worth.
I'd call it being desperate to eek out the last drop of performance, in the vain hopes of running your slow Windows a little faster.
Since I went the GNU/Linux route full time back in 2001, I have never overclocked a machine from that time on. Most hardware is fast enough when being managed by a well written system.
Realization: Not everybody runs Windows, but I can't imagine the advantage of risking system damage if a non-MS system runs very well at factory defaults.
Edited 2007-02-09 16:40







Member since:
2006-07-15
Comparing apples with oranges is usus nowadays I guess?
>And people with a sane one would go compile their own kernels, for example?
But this is to some extent true too, nobody in BSD would do it without need for example
But the nonsense begins, if you're seeing a need in overclocking your hardware. Some people call this an error in reasoning.