amd 64 2800+ oc

i am interested in a amd 64 2800+ since they're quite cheap. oh well so i'm interested to know how well they oc. i think they should do good since they have the newcastle core and the newcastles are supposed to replace clawhammer.

Yes instead of the full 1MB of cache being half disabled - the Newcastle is supposed to just have 512KB of L2 cache from the start (this would imply a smaller die but may not be the case). The current XP2800's as far as I am aware are clawhammers (i.e half the cache disabled and same die size a 1MB) - but to check I think the end of the OPN code for Newcastle will be AX (a further iteration of revision CG). However I have to admit I am simewhat confused as to what the difference between a Newcastle and Clawhammer is apart from the cache (disabled v non existent to start with).

yeah i know about the cache size thing but i want to know if they oc well. i am hoping it to atleast 2.2ghz

Very few have purchased 2800+ A64's with intent to overclock simply because they do not have a 10X multiplier. It likely will overclock just as similar as a 3000+, but with the 3000+ you have the option of running with the 10X multiplier.

It would not be a good idea at all to purchase a motherboard without a PCI/AGP lock if you decide to purchase a 2800+ A64.

2.2ghz should be fairly easy with a A64 2800+ even with the 9x divider. I was running my A64 3000+ at 275x9 (2475mhz) using clockgen and the 5:6 memory divider for testing and benchmarking and only settled on 245x10 because I did not like using software overclocking. If you plan on running your memory 1:1, make sure you have some damn good RAM and a nforce3 250 motherboard so you have the PCI/AGP locks.

jhatfie what core is your 3000+. i heard that the 3000+ is now a newcastle core.

so does anyone actually own a 2800+ amd 64

My 3000+ is the CO core and not the more recent CG. CPU-Z shows it as newcastle, but I believe that is incorrect. CAAOC0402 if I remember right.