Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Mobile XP-M 2500+ or Mobile XP-M 2600+

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
November 26, 2004 10:35:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
the better choice.

Comments? Thanks.
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
November 27, 2004 7:54:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"the6carrules" <the6carrules@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cab7a65f.0411261935.1b4378fe@posting.google.com...
>I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
> Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
> favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
> the better choice.
>
> Comments? Thanks.

I've got a $76 XP-M 2400+ running at 200x12---2.4Ghz. 1.675v
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
November 27, 2004 1:34:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 04:54:27 +0000, Kill Bill wrote:

>
> "the6carrules" <the6carrules@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cab7a65f.0411261935.1b4378fe@posting.google.com...
>>I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
>> Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
>> favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
>> the better choice.
>>
>> Comments? Thanks.
>
> I've got a $76 XP-M 2400+ running at 200x12---2.4Ghz. 1.675v

Why are you bothering to reply to the above post if you are not going to
attempt to answer his/her question? We really don't care about your
XP-M-2400...

Larry Gagnon
Related resources
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
November 28, 2004 4:48:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

I went for the 2600+. Eventhough the chips have the same core, I think they
are separated on quality and you could get a higher overclock at a lower
voltage with the 2600+, so for $10 bucks I would go for it.

It is running at 216x11.5@1.825 V, but I think with the new BIOS upgrade I
might be able to push it up a bit higher or be able to drop the core down.

If you check the other posts, I have loaded the Nov 2004, DFI Bios and the
system seems to be Prime95 stable at a lower core voltage at the moment it
is running 1.0 V lower.

Pete

"the6carrules" <the6carrules@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cab7a65f.0411261935.1b4378fe@posting.google.com...
>I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
> Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
> favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
> the better choice.
>
> Comments? Thanks.
November 29, 2004 10:20:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"Larry Gagnon" <lagagnon@fakeuniserve.com> wrote in message
news:p an.2004.11.27.18.34.06.228488@fakeuniserve.com...
> On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 04:54:27 +0000, Kill Bill wrote:
>
>>
>> "the6carrules" <the6carrules@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:cab7a65f.0411261935.1b4378fe@posting.google.com...
>>>I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
>>> Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
>>> favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
>>> the better choice.
>>>
>>> Comments? Thanks.
>>
>> I've got a $76 XP-M 2400+ running at 200x12---2.4Ghz. 1.675v
>
> Why are you bothering to reply to the above post if you are not going to
> attempt to answer his/her question? We really don't care about your
> XP-M-2400...
>

That's a bit harsh, Larry. He does make a point that his cheaper mobile CPU
goes well. If he can get the CPU to 2.5GHz without excessive Vcore then it
could be a candidate for "best bang for the buck".
!