<pre> Yes, then it will be getting down to about the size of your e-penis...muhaaahaaahhaaaaaa </pre><p>_____________________________________________
<font color=red> And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign </font color=red>
You know what's funny is that I ordered my 3500+ about 2 weeks ago thinking it was a Newcastle core, but when everything was built I ran CPUID last night and was suprised to see that it was actually the 90nm Winchester core. Pretty nice surprise if you ask me
AMD Athlon XP 2100+ stock
Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe
1GB generic RAM
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro 360/335
I'm glad to hear that the 2005 showroom model hasn't got any 90nm manufacturing issues. I don't like to jump on a band wagon right at the start only to find out about early teething problems.
I think I've mixed enough metaphors for one post.
Is it the motherboard limiting to 2.6 ghz?
It seems weird that both chips would stop at the excact same speed, 2610. So it would either be the mobo or memory i guess.
If it is memory, they should have tried raising the multi to 10x or whatever and see how high they could crank it.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by pjordan on 10/18/04 11:57 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
I don't like to jump on a band wagon right at the start only to find out about early teething problems.
I don't think that it's problematic to use a new technology at first (unless it'S Prescott! :smile: ).
In the high-tech digital world, there is no problem to get the first new stuff. Unless you want to let the fabrication process mature, to get better O/C potential, the new 90nm AMD CPU are 100% reliable to me. AMD can't push to the market CPU that are not 100% working! CPU's are not like cars... They can't be fixed after they are manufactured!