On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15:57:27 -0400, General Schvantzkoph
wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:05:37 +0000, Wes Newell wrote:

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 01:00:38 +1000, No One Realy wrote:

Whats the difference to the 4200. Which was the one i wanted but to
expensive. Why is the 3800 X2 less expensive ?

It's less expensive because AMD wanted it to be. The difference is the
3800+ X2 has a 10 multiplier for 2000MHz, and the 4200+ X2 has an 11
multiplier for 2200MHz. Even though they're both capable of going higher,
this has been the way CPU's have always been marketed. The actual
manufacturing cost of all of them are basically the same. It's just that
the profit margins are greater on the higher priced ones. That's why
people overclock the slower models. Although overclock is a misnomer IMO.
If you truely overclocked the cpu, it wouldn't run. Maxiclock would be a
better descripter, mxaimizing the clock speed that the core works at.

Don't count on overclocking X2s yet, they are brand new and there isn't a
lot of margin in AMD's process. I have a 4400+, it's not completely stable
even at the normal clock rates.

Something must be wrong if you can't get it running stable at normal
clock rates.

Your problems may be memory related, try running Memtest86+ for 24
hours and see if your memory isn't the cause.

Steve