Yeah it said that in the article.
"cost-effective" in the article means "cheap"
Price and how does it compare to a Core Contact Freezer?
If e-banking stops working because of the browser's version number, then there are some issue with that e-banking system.
The menu bar can be easily re-enabled in firefox. Just hold ALT.
I am not really getting people's fuss about the way Mozilla is going with the version numbers.
Who cares if they are jumping version numbers in...
No problemo! I am running Firefox 8 Nigthly builds and man it's fast. It uses 30% less RAM than Firefox 6 apparently.
For those complaining about add-ons compatability, download Nightly Tester Tools add-on until your add-ons are supported.
1372 @ 7-7-7-20 1T proved to be a tad slower than 1648 9-9-9-24 2T.
CPU/NB at 2200.
I tried 1648 8-8-8-24 2T with 1.65V but the BIOS would display...
I raised the FSB from 200 to 206 so the CPU now runs at 4.12GHz (1.376V) and RAM now runs at 1648 9-9-9-24 1.5V.
Here are the results:
The BIOS won't post with NB @ 2600 1.25V and RAM @ 1600 8-8-8-21 and 1.610V.
I tried many times and had to clear the CMOS each time.
These are old tests. I just got back home and I am going to get started now. Going for 8-8-8-21 first @ 1600.
Here are my results:
1333 @ 7-7-7-21 and NB @2200
1600 @ 9-9-9-24 and NB @2200
Thanks for all the information you provided. I will keep the thread updated with my tests.
How do you personally test the stability of timings? By stress testing the CPU using prime95 and such?
I'll test and see how much performance gain there is and then decide whether it's worth it or not.
So you're saying raise the NB and achieve better timings with 1600? What are the safe limits for the NB?
My CPU is a C3 as confirmed by CPU-Z. If I were to overclock the NB further, wouldn't the gain of 1600 over 1333 remain relatively the same? I am...
Currently at 2200.
Done using AIDA64 Memory Benchmark Tool.
RAM/Timings Read Write Copy Latency
1333 7-7-7-21 8945 7484 11248 50.1
1600 9-9-9-24 9095...
I benchmarked 1333 with tight timings vs 1600 with stock 9-9-9-24 and the 1600 configuration beats the 1333 one in both bandwidths and latency....
NOTED. We can then conclude that 1333 & tight timings > 1600 & regular timings.
I'll go with that and start fine-tuning as I progress. So this should be better than running the memory controller of the 955 at 1600?
I mean if...
If I change my 1600 RAM's speed in BIOS to 1333 and use 1333 timings, would I still need to modify the NB to accommodate this "underclocking"?
Separate names with a comma.