-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
get the mobile 2600??
- Thread starter nalatif
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Location
- Some where in Michigan
they been clocking close to the same
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2004
Re: Re: get the mobile 2600??
Some people get significantly better OC results with a 2400+ than with the 2500+... your results are just out of the norm.
It doesn't justify the $5
blkgti said:
Some people get significantly better OC results with a 2400+ than with the 2500+... your results are just out of the norm.
It doesn't justify the $5
Re: Re: Re: get the mobile 2600??
I've reported the results of my own testing. If you'd rather parrot what some have asserted, many without ever testing the chips, it's certainly up to you.
$5?? I guess I never looked at the price of a Happy Meal as a determining factor.
Hydr0 Styles said:
I've reported the results of my own testing. If you'd rather parrot what some have asserted, many without ever testing the chips, it's certainly up to you.
$5?? I guess I never looked at the price of a Happy Meal as a determining factor.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2004
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the mobile 2600??
I find it strange that you quoted my post, and replied by asking your own question and then answering it. I don't recall saying that one chip designation was better then another. If you'd like to address something that I actually wrote, I'd love to respond.
Hydr0 Styles said:
I find it strange that you quoted my post, and replied by asking your own question and then answering it. I don't recall saying that one chip designation was better then another. If you'd like to address something that I actually wrote, I'd love to respond.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2003
- Location
- Overland Park, Kansas
That is the first screenshot of a 3 gig Barton that I have ever seen. What type of cooling is being used on that, or do you know?
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2003
- Location
- South of Boston
I just got my mobile 2600+ and I'm at 2.68ghz, 1.85v.
It seems to run a lot cooler than my old barton too.
Would I do it [2600 over 2400] again? Hell yes.
It seems to run a lot cooler than my old barton too.
Would I do it [2600 over 2400] again? Hell yes.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2004
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the mobile 2600??
The original poster was asking if the 2600+ is worth the money.
Your reply was that your 2600+ is overclocking better than the two 2500's you have. This is implying that you recommend he purchases the 2600+ because of better overclockability.
I've shown that this is not the case, you just got a good chip.
blkgti said:
The original poster was asking if the 2600+ is worth the money.
Your reply was that your 2600+ is overclocking better than the two 2500's you have. This is implying that you recommend he purchases the 2600+ because of better overclockability.
I've shown that this is not the case, you just got a good chip.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2001
- Location
- Dark side of hell
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the mobile 2600??
I think he was just giving the results he has gotten. which is what the poster wanted. And you refute what you think he was implying with a pic of someones results without even stating what kind of coolking is being used or if it is even stable at that speed. Which is something that is not really usefull to the thread starter. Now if you wanted to link to where you got the picture it might be of some use.
Hydr0 Styles said:
The original poster was asking if the 2600+ is worth the money.
Your reply was that your 2600+ is overclocking better than the two 2500's you have. This is implying that you recommend he purchases the 2600+ because of better overclockability.
I've shown that this is not the case, you just got a good chip.
I think he was just giving the results he has gotten. which is what the poster wanted. And you refute what you think he was implying with a pic of someones results without even stating what kind of coolking is being used or if it is even stable at that speed. Which is something that is not really usefull to the thread starter. Now if you wanted to link to where you got the picture it might be of some use.
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Location
- Ballston Spa, NY
As with all chips, the higher the model number, the more likely it will clock high, but this late in the production run, there is barely a difference between the 3 mobile bartons. IMO, a difference of $27 is not worth an extra 50-100 MHz... 2.62GHz is pretty damn good.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2002
- Location
- Sotira, Cyprus
I concur,
I have read threads where peeps have bought several 2400+ and have only found one which has clocked to a 'nice' clock speed. At the same time I have read posts where someone has got lucky with a 2400+ and got a 'nice' overclock.
Stepping up to the 2500+ I have witnessed the same scenario, but with more chance of getting a 'nice' chip the first time round.
But i think that ChillPhatCat hits the nail on the head, of ALL the threads I have read abt with 2600+ EVERY ONE except one has got to 2600mhz with average cooling. Now for me being in the UK, I would rather pay a bit xtra and get someone to send me a 2600+ which I will have 95% chance on getting a 'nice' chip rather than getting a 2400+ which has a 50% chance of getting a similar clock speed.
In my case it is worth the xtra money. But their is no doubt abt it for me, the 2600+ as a whole overclock better than their 2400+/2500+ counterparts.
To Hydr0 Styles,
I dont think crimestyles or blkgti comments needed your 'interpretation' they expressed their experiences with the mobile chips they have had which are perfectly valid.
For you to say that the xp2500+ quantively clock higher than the xp2600+ on the basis of a few peeps 'nice' overclocks is unfounded for me. Your comments have proven NOTHING!
mong
I have read threads where peeps have bought several 2400+ and have only found one which has clocked to a 'nice' clock speed. At the same time I have read posts where someone has got lucky with a 2400+ and got a 'nice' overclock.
Stepping up to the 2500+ I have witnessed the same scenario, but with more chance of getting a 'nice' chip the first time round.
But i think that ChillPhatCat hits the nail on the head, of ALL the threads I have read abt with 2600+ EVERY ONE except one has got to 2600mhz with average cooling. Now for me being in the UK, I would rather pay a bit xtra and get someone to send me a 2600+ which I will have 95% chance on getting a 'nice' chip rather than getting a 2400+ which has a 50% chance of getting a similar clock speed.
In my case it is worth the xtra money. But their is no doubt abt it for me, the 2600+ as a whole overclock better than their 2400+/2500+ counterparts.
To Hydr0 Styles,
I dont think crimestyles or blkgti comments needed your 'interpretation' they expressed their experiences with the mobile chips they have had which are perfectly valid.
For you to say that the xp2500+ quantively clock higher than the xp2600+ on the basis of a few peeps 'nice' overclocks is unfounded for me. Your comments have proven NOTHING!
mong
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2003
Here's a quick way to see if all our Mobile chips are created equal: Test all the 2400 and 2500 cpus 133x15 (the default speed of the 2600+) @ 1.45V and see if they pass or fail P95. If they all pass, then they probably aren't sorting them as particularly as we thought.
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Location
- Ballston Spa, NY
timzak said:
Most of them will, but that doesn't mean anything, how high will the 2600+ clock with that 1.45V?
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2003
- Location
- Lexington, KY
well, i look at the vcores when I chose to order a 2500+ mobile. The 2400+ and 2600+ BOTH on newegg show stock vcores of 1.65 vcore, whereas the 2500+ is showing a stock vcore of 1.45. So, to me, the 2500+ is going to run cooler therefore possibly go higher...
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2002
- Location
- Orlando, FL
Nick Burns said:
its prommy cooled afaik.
