I'm talking about the 165, 170, etc. The 939-pin dual-core Opterons.
So we've all seen how beastly the 14x series Opterons are. People are reporting 50% overclocks on air, almost regularly. And I think we've all seen our fair share of the people who managed to get over 3GHz on high-end air or water. Of course, there's the issue of the CABNE series, which are FX-line processors, versus the CABYE, which are San Diego cores, and the CABGE, which are supposedly trash.
But what about the dual-cores? I mean, dual 1.8GHz with a 2MB cache isn't bad. And considering it's from the Opteron line, which is tested more strigently than Athlons, that thing should be good for at least a 25% overclock. Why haven't we heard anything about them? Are they not as successful as the single-core variants? Also, they have an operating voltage of 1.3-1.35, so that leaves a good amount of headroom without having to worry about heat problems.
I'm starting to think I should've gone with an Opteron 170 and taken my chances.
So we've all seen how beastly the 14x series Opterons are. People are reporting 50% overclocks on air, almost regularly. And I think we've all seen our fair share of the people who managed to get over 3GHz on high-end air or water. Of course, there's the issue of the CABNE series, which are FX-line processors, versus the CABYE, which are San Diego cores, and the CABGE, which are supposedly trash.
But what about the dual-cores? I mean, dual 1.8GHz with a 2MB cache isn't bad. And considering it's from the Opteron line, which is tested more strigently than Athlons, that thing should be good for at least a 25% overclock. Why haven't we heard anything about them? Are they not as successful as the single-core variants? Also, they have an operating voltage of 1.3-1.35, so that leaves a good amount of headroom without having to worry about heat problems.
I'm starting to think I should've gone with an Opteron 170 and taken my chances.