2500+ M

[Guest]

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

So whats the verdict on these fellas then? Are they the new celeron 750's or
just another case of AMD making one good batch a la 1700+ JIHUB's?

 

[Guest]

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

They are pretty good overclockers. The desktop 2500+ were hitting the wall
about 2.3ghz and the new mobile ones are hitting 2.5-2.6ghz at the same
voltages.


"Scrumpyman" <zen45885@zen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4069fab8$0$3915$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk...
> So whats the verdict on these fellas then? Are they the new celeron 750's
or
> just another case of AMD making one good batch a la 1700+ JIHUB's?
>
>

 

[QBall]

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

They're the new celeron 750's alright.
About 100-200 MHz faster than their desktop cousins.

"Scrumpyman" <zen45885@zen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4069fab8$0$3915$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk...
> So whats the verdict on these fellas then? Are they the new celeron 750's
or
> just another case of AMD making one good batch a la 1700+ JIHUB's?
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

Are you smoking crack?
http://forums.amdmb.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=297449

"QBall" <qball__@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:c4dkum$71i$1@titan.btinternet.com...
> They're the new celeron 750's alright.
> About 100-200 MHz faster than their desktop cousins.
>
> "Scrumpyman" <zen45885@zen.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:4069fab8$0$3915$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk...
> > So whats the verdict on these fellas then? Are they the new celeron
750's
> or
> > just another case of AMD making one good batch a la 1700+ JIHUB's?
> >
> >
>
>

 

[QBall]

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

I could run my desktop 2500 at 2.49 GHz.
I run my mobile 2400 at 2.58 GHz ..... a diff of about 100 MHz.
What are you on about crack for ?
Mobiles are good from 2.55 to 2.65 GHz on air.
I'd be sceptical about claims of 2.7 GHz stable on air.
Water-cooled maybe, but not on air.

The mobiles
"Kill Bill" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:ANsac.29292$Lq4.4650@twister.socal.rr.com...
> Are you smoking crack?
> http://forums.amdmb.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=297449
>
> "QBall" <qball__@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:c4dkum$71i$1@titan.btinternet.com...
> > They're the new celeron 750's alright.
> > About 100-200 MHz faster than their desktop cousins.
> >
> > "Scrumpyman" <zen45885@zen.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:4069fab8$0$3915$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk...
> > > So whats the verdict on these fellas then? Are they the new celeron
> 750's
> > or
> > > just another case of AMD making one good batch a la 1700+ JIHUB's?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

"QBall" <qball__@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:c4dqaq$c2d$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> I could run my desktop 2500 at 2.49 GHz.
> I run my mobile 2400 at 2.58 GHz ..... a diff of about 100 MHz.
> What are you on about crack for ?
> Mobiles are good from 2.55 to 2.65 GHz on air.
> I'd be sceptical about claims of 2.7 GHz stable on air.
> Water-cooled maybe, but not on air.
>
> The mobiles


Looking at the 2 screen shots you find that the NF7 table on the left doesnt
jive with the cpuid table on the right..
I dont know if that's Pr00f that it's alter'd.. or if he decided to just
paste a "un updated" screenshot of the software..

 

[QBall]

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

His sig shows it's watercooled.
That's perfectly credible.

"rstlne" <.@text.news.virgin.net> wrote in message
news:ZDwac.256$Tq5.120@newsfe3-win.server.ntli.net...
>
> "QBall" <qball__@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:c4dqaq$c2d$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> > I could run my desktop 2500 at 2.49 GHz.
> > I run my mobile 2400 at 2.58 GHz ..... a diff of about 100 MHz.
> > What are you on about crack for ?
> > Mobiles are good from 2.55 to 2.65 GHz on air.
> > I'd be sceptical about claims of 2.7 GHz stable on air.
> > Water-cooled maybe, but not on air.
> >
> > The mobiles
>
>
> Looking at the 2 screen shots you find that the NF7 table on the left
doesnt
> jive with the cpuid table on the right..
> I dont know if that's Pr00f that it's alter'd.. or if he decided to just
> paste a "un updated" screenshot of the software..
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

This is all good news i must say, i think its time to place that order after
all...
"rstlne" <.@text.news.virgin.net> wrote in message
news:ZDwac.256$Tq5.120@newsfe3-win.server.ntli.net...
>
> "QBall" <qball__@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:c4dqaq$c2d$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> > I could run my desktop 2500 at 2.49 GHz.
> > I run my mobile 2400 at 2.58 GHz ..... a diff of about 100 MHz.
> > What are you on about crack for ?
> > Mobiles are good from 2.55 to 2.65 GHz on air.
> > I'd be sceptical about claims of 2.7 GHz stable on air.
> > Water-cooled maybe, but not on air.
> >
> > The mobiles
>
>
> Looking at the 2 screen shots you find that the NF7 table on the left
doesnt
> jive with the cpuid table on the right..
> I dont know if that's Pr00f that it's alter'd.. or if he decided to just
> paste a "un updated" screenshot of the software..
>
>