Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
some theories on finding best batch C2D processor, myth.. busted?..plausible?.. confirmed?
|
TSjinaun
|
 Oct 5 2008, 10:43 AM, updated 18y ago
|
where are my stars???
|
QUOTE We are going to be focusing on the notch in the IHS. In that notch you will find two lines of numbers. The bottom line is where we want to focus. Actually, it's just the last two numbers that we are concerned with. Some theories say it's the last four numbers, but the one I'm spreading is just the last two. Obviously, the last two digits have a range of "00" to "99". The theory is that the closer these numbers are to "00" the better overclocker you will have. The reason behind this theory is the position on the wafer. "00" represents the closest to the center of the wafer and "99" the furthest away from center. The center of the wafer represents the better of the batch. Now in my very limited experience with this theory, the few CPU's that I have looked at have actually had a lower VID with the lower number and have actually overclocked better. But as I stated, I have limited experience with this and have tested fewer than 20 CPUs. So, my results could have been purely coincidental. It's a theory, so you can try it for yourself and see how it works. sos: http://www.cluboc.net/reviews/cpu/intel/C2D/E8400_E0/p2.asp |
|
|
|
|
|
glock88
|
Oct 5 2008, 11:14 AM
|
|
|
interesting
|
|
|
|
|
|
safone
|
Oct 5 2008, 11:17 AM
|
|
|
 ..I wonder izzit true or not.. Will check it for myself..but lazy to take out my HSF lar..  |
|
|
|
|
|
syahirax
|
Oct 5 2008, 02:20 PM
|
|
|
does this apply to C2Q too?  oh primarily on E8XXX :| This post has been edited by syahirax: Oct 5 2008, 02:21 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
mfcm
|
Oct 5 2008, 07:38 PM
|
|
|
wow nice..will check it later wat number i got  |
|
|
|
|
|
Silverfire
|
Oct 6 2008, 07:48 AM
|
|
|
But to get so many processors to test... Quite costy >.<
|
|
|
|
|
|
nimrod2
|
Oct 7 2008, 02:06 PM
|
|
|
should ask some hardcore reviewer to come n try out this theory.
where's goldfries?
|
|
|
|
|
|
seanlimys
|
Oct 7 2008, 02:17 PM
|
|
|
lo..nice article..shud help ppl to look around for good batch of cpus
|
|
|
|
|
|
OC4/3
|
Oct 7 2008, 08:35 PM
|
.
|
QUOTE(Silverfire @ Oct 6 2008, 07:48 AM) But to get so many processors to test... Quite costy >.< There are a lot of extreme ocer doing this  |
|
|
|
|
|
@meno
|
Oct 9 2008, 05:01 PM
|
|
|
Does this apply only to E0 E8xxx or all E8xxx?
Well, what stated makes a little sense, but how would it be that being the nearest to the center of the waffer offer better OC ability?
|
|
|
|
|
|
sonicscourge
|
Oct 9 2008, 07:07 PM
|
|
|
Dang, this seems to be interesting....Will check my proc and see then.... But does this theory applies to all E8xxx?
|
|
|
|
|
|
syahirax
|
Oct 9 2008, 07:28 PM
|
|
|
how about quad?anyone could share some tips?besides VID?
This post has been edited by syahirax: Oct 9 2008, 07:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
tech_frix
|
Oct 9 2008, 08:24 PM
|
|
|
lowest vid doesnt means best for OC for Quad especially...
|
|
|
|
|
|
syahirax
|
Oct 9 2008, 08:33 PM
|
|
|
ive tried 3 Q6600 so far,and lower VID proc overclocks better than higher VID |
|
|
|
|
|
tech_frix
|
Oct 9 2008, 08:34 PM
|
|
|
i think its maybe ur luck....
mine vid kinda low but highest can achieve below 1.4vcore is 3.4ghz...
big disappointment....
|
|
|
|
|
|
syahirax
|
Oct 9 2008, 09:46 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(tech_frix @ Oct 9 2008, 08:34 PM) i think its maybe ur luck.... mine vid kinda low but highest can achieve below 1.4vcore is 3.4ghz... big disappointment.... agreed.sometimes it all depends on luck too. |
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0190sec
0.24
6 queries
GZIP Disabled