35W Desktop AMD!

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
zenmaster

zenmaster

Splendid
Feb 21, 2006
3,867
0
22,790
They probably just redefined the TDP.

You will find the TPD listed the same for CPUs in the same line-up, even though they run at different speeds.

The lower speed chips usually use much less power than specified by the TDP.

AMD likely just go smart and changed the rating to better reflect power usage of a lower end chip.
 
mathiasschnell

mathiasschnell

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2007
406
0
18,780
And here I thought they phased out that processor. Pretty sure I have that in my PC too, or maybe it's the non-EE one. Either way, doesn't matter cause I overclocked mine to 2.8 GHz. :greenjumpy:
 
D

dario77

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2007
75
0
18,630
don't get too overzealous with those overclocks, folks....you'll wind up with BBQ chips!

hehe...how long can we keep this up?
 
D

dario77

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2007
75
0
18,630


best one so far!!!
and no, we're not high....we're amd people. we make our own fun....

then again, you kinda have to make your own fun, otherwise its just entertainment.
then then again again...this thread sure is entertaining!!

of course, our chips are surely baked. especially the 9950!!
 
MU_Engineer

MU_Engineer

Splendid
Feb 18, 2006
3,868
4
23,165


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000 gives a detailed answer. Here is the gist of the reason:

- The president and vice-president are not directly elected by the people. The Electoral College electors actually elect them.
- Electoral College electors are divided up so that there is one for each senator (2 per each state) and one for each representative (varies per state by state population.)
- In 48 states, whatever candidate wins the popular vote statewide has all of the electors from that state vote in the Electoral College for that candidate. Nebraska and Maine have two electors vote for whoever got the most votes statewide and the other electors vote for whoever won the vote in their congressional district.
- The candidate with the greatest number of electors vote for them wins.
- Electors can vote for whoever they want or abstain but with VERY few exceptions vote for whoever won their state/district.
- Gore happened to have more people in the nation vote for him but it was an unequal distribution of voters by state. This means he had larger majorities in some of the states that he won compared to Bush (which led to many popular votes) but he didn't get enough people in enough states to give him a majority in those states, decreasing his number of electoral votes.

You may wonder why we have such a system when it would seem easier to just tally up the total votes nationwide. Part of the reason is because the U.S. was originally founded as a republic, where the people elect representatives and those representatives do their bidding. This includes submitting and voting on legislation and voting for the president and VP. The representatives used to elect senators also, but that was abolished in 1913 with the 17th Amendment (they are now elected directly by the people.) The other reason is the reasoning behind the U.S. Senate, which is to prevent one or a few populous states from setting the entire nation's policy. This is a real issue as three states (California, New York, Texas) have 25% of the population of the country and nine (the three above plus Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Georgia) have over half of the population.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom