computerlab
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 134 (0.02/day)
- Location
- india
System Name | l2aZor |
---|---|
Processor | intel core2duo E4400 |
Motherboard | intel dg965ry |
Cooling | air cooled |
Memory | 2gb 800Mhz kingston |
Video Card(s) | sapphire hd3850 512mb |
Storage | seagate 500gb sataII |
Display(s) | lg 15" lcd |
Case | normal...:P |
Audio Device(s) | onboard high definition audio(IDT Audio) |
Power Supply | bundled with the case..:D |
Software | windows vista ultimate 32bit |
plz help me with the question that whether the transistor count increases with increase in multiplier in a same series of processors?
my catch here is that why do we say that the overclockability of higher model is more?
just because of higher multiplier or some thing else...
my practical life example:
i'm having a sempron clocked at 1.8 ghz and another clocked at 2.1ghz both with 256kb l2 cache. wen i overclock both of them @2.4 both of them give the same performance that i benchmarked using 3dmark05. the diff is that the model with 9x multiplier reaches 2.4ghz @266 fsb and the model with 10.5x multiplier reaches 2.4ghz @228 fsb... and no increase in performance is noticed in both of them if fsb is increased further.
so why do we prefer higher model for overclocking?
my catch here is that why do we say that the overclockability of higher model is more?
just because of higher multiplier or some thing else...
my practical life example:
i'm having a sempron clocked at 1.8 ghz and another clocked at 2.1ghz both with 256kb l2 cache. wen i overclock both of them @2.4 both of them give the same performance that i benchmarked using 3dmark05. the diff is that the model with 9x multiplier reaches 2.4ghz @266 fsb and the model with 10.5x multiplier reaches 2.4ghz @228 fsb... and no increase in performance is noticed in both of them if fsb is increased further.
so why do we prefer higher model for overclocking?