• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

***Fastest Single Core x86 CPU Ever Made***

messiah khan said:
Core2 solo?

Technically, still dual core, just has one of the cores disabled, it is possible through extensive jtag knowledge to unlock the core.

Come on you lot, think outside the box...

A C2D clocked at 4Ghz with one of the cores disabled in bios. ;)

Somehow, i think that already crossed most people's minds......
 
for me its gotta be the xp-m's , 2500 and 2600-m especially. A barton core with an unlocked multi and low stock volts was just an awesome idea :) and TBH probably a good end to socket A :)
 
SideWinder said:
Xp 2500+ Bartons...i remember seeing hundreds of specs with these in them clocked to stupidly high levels. :)

In terms of % clockability, they're nowhere near E6300s. But somehow Bartons were more fun. You don't get the pages of screenshots any more, like you did when people were playing with Bartons and BH-5...

Overclocking is so easy now that people usually just do it for the convenience and not for the fun of it.
 
Mattus said:
In terms of % clockability, they're nowhere near E6300s. But somehow Bartons were more fun. You don't get the pages of screenshots any more, like you did when people were playing with Bartons and BH-5...

Overclocking is so easy now that people usually just do it for the convenience and not for the fun of it.

Yeah, the bartons were incredible. It was also the point where there were loads of intel fanboys who wouldn't accept amd could make a good cpu, then someone would just do a screenie of some benchies with a 2.5ghz 2500 which would wipe the floor out of anything intel, especially cause they were going for less than £80.

With the c2d's, just upping the fsb alone will get you to around 3ghz on some, which is more than enough for most people. Gone are the days where everyone spent days tweaking every last thing out of their system :( .

Although the 64's were better cpu's, for price:performance, has to be a barton.
 
My XP-2500M did 2.4Ghz
My 3000+ Venice did 2.2Ghz
My 4000+ SD does 3ghz

I look forward to my C2D upgrade in the future :D
 
SideWinder said:
Xp 2500+ Bartons...i remember seeing hundreds of specs with these in them clocked to stupidly high levels. :)


I would've thought the 'Magic' XP1700 were the most preferred.. getting to speeds of 2.8 or higher
 
INTEL P4 HT Northwood 2.4/2.6/2.8 (m0)

AMD Opteron 144/146

Cartho said:
I dont see why anyone would buy a single core Core 2...
What is the point when you could get a dual core or quad core one?
Because it would be cheaper, run cooler and use less power maybe?

SideWinder said:
Xp 2500+ Bartons...i remember seeing hundreds of specs with these in them clocked to stupidly high levels. :)
I don't think they overclocked that well? but yeah your right most of us had one of them at some point! :)
 
Big.Wayne said:
INTEL P4 HT Northwood 2.4/2.6/2.8 (m0)
The m0 stepping northwoods were shockingly decent as well. 3.2ghz seemed no problem for most, even with stock volts with some.


The XP bartons were good, but the XP mobiles were far superior, due to lower heat output, unlocked multi and lower voltage needed (at stock they needed a ridiculously low voltage).
 
Big.Wayne said:
INTEL P4 HT Northwood 2.4/2.6/2.8 (m0)
cobxx said:
The m0 stepping northwoods were shockingly decent as well
p4m0lw8.jpg


ai7sp946edit6ts.jpg


Feb 2004 I think :)
 
SideWinder said:
Xp 2500+ Bartons...i remember seeing hundreds of specs with these in them clocked to stupidly high levels. :)


I had a 2500+ that done 2.3ghz stock volts on a crappy motherboard (gigabyte nforce 2 with no voltage control)... about 3 months after the motherboard actually melted, at least half the solders did.
 
Back
Top Bottom