I see your point but I enabled the C1 control so that idle temps remain low. This means that (and i tried it) when my pc is idle or not working too hard, my temps sit around 33-35 degrees celcius (CoreTemp) even at a 3GHz OC. When i push it to 100% load, it goes up to 50 degrees.
BUT... I was thinking... See, Intel wanted to be the Top Dog again when they released the Core 2 series of CPUs, right? These CPUs boasted "never before seen" performance. Now, if these chips could handle such and OC and remain 100% stable, then why didnt Intel just clock each CPU higher? For example, E6400 @ 2.4GHz or E6600 @2.9GHz or X6800 @ 4Ghz?? Why didnt they do that? I mean, this wouldve ensured that AMD would not be able to come close to them... Must be a reason....
Firstly, yields. Not all the chips overclock that well. I don't know how much truth there is in one story I have seen that they select poorer yield chips for oem and the better yield chips for retail. This way the ones they assume will overclclock less go into systems that wont be overclocked, and you or I get to buy ones that overclock like mad. Ive seen that story in a couple of places but I think it is hearsay as it is quite difficult to achieve this.
The second thing (which is just my belief) is that if you want your chip to be vuanted by the enthusiast community (who are generally very influential when it comes to advising friends or customers) then make it one that overclocks big time. Lets face it, performance and everything is nice, but what we all go thru to get the biggest overclock can be something else, and delivering a chip that overclocks so much more than the current AMD chips has given Intel big qudos amongst enthusiasts and is reaping its rewards for intel to AMD's cost.
Of course, I could be talking bollocks.
These are all good points. In addition, Intel has almost always been conservative with their clock speeds except when faced with a competitor with an inherently superior product (AMD A64) and requiring them to extract all the speed they could from their products (P4/PD) to compete. Once the C2D had a comfortable lead over AMD, Intel returned to their conservative clocks where the CPUs won't overheat even if the heatsink grease isn't applied perfectly and the heatsink fins get choked with 5 years of dust. That way they have it both ways - rock solid zero maintenance reliability for the mainstream, and fantastic performance for the enthusiasts.
Plus, they have zero development effort upgrades to offer us. Look at their E6850 (3.0 GHz, 1333 MHz FSB) scheduled for Q3 release at $266. Why so cheap? Maybe it's nothing but an E6600 with a pinmod to request the 1333 FSB? So by knowing how to adjust the FSB in BIOS you can get the part (or at least equivalent) 6 months early ...
(I could be talking bollocks too, but I think this is reasonable)