So the new e4300 dual core chip is hitting the market this month and I'm torn between saving 20 bucks for the e4300 or going for the e6300, what caught my eye on the e4300 is the 9x multiplier, for an overclocker will the e4300 beat the e6300 which has a lower multiplier?
The E4300 is CHEAPER than the E6300 overall because the overclocker doesn't have to buy expensive overclocking RAM and a high-end overclocking motherboard to increase the clock speed to similar speeds.
EDIT: What Epsilon84 said.
Hey I see you have pentium 166!!! That brings back alot of good memories. We were pumping those puppies out in fab9 around 97 and they were processed on 4" wafers. In my area, diffuision, we had 300 wafer load sizes so we could pump out several thousands of wafers a shift. OK sorry that was off topic...don't mind me.
Yeah, the PentiumMMX 166 (at 233) replaced a Pentium 75 running at 120MHz. These babies were AWESOME (Who wouldn't like a 60% overclock?) overclockers! I couldn't ever get it to run stable at 133MHz, even with the VRe (3.52V) setting. Have any clue why?
Now, the E4300/E6300 and Celeron 300A (performance wise, not just clock speed wise!) are the only chips that I know of that well exceed the legendary overclockability of the lowly P75 :-D
Pentium 4s don't count
, they were too hot to begin with.
Only thing I know is how much a pain in the arse those thermco furnaces were. They were so freaking sensitive to any power fluctuation that any time we had a power bump they would a go into reset. I was about 21 at the time and just worked on the tools so the only interaction I got from engineering was with the equipment engineers so I never had to deal with the process engineers.