Hey, a friend told me to get the 2200 mobile instead of the 2500 mobile because he says it can overclock alot better. I plan on using a SLK900 or SLK947 when i do it. anybody sure how high this cpu will go when i want to overclock it on an abit nf7-s? thanks
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Overclocking 2200M vs 2500M
- Thread starter karnick
- Start date
bradbowl, you are correct, AMD offers both 256k and 512k versions. I hadn't checked Newegg's stock lately in terms of AMD's mobile processors. I apologize for any confusion caused on my part.
It also seems, as dotZIP states, that the processor runs at 35W and naturally 1.35V, in which case it could indeed be a good overclocker. There are reports of 2.5-2.6 GHz with it, no small feat considering the price. I suppose the question would be rather 2200+ 35/1.35 or 2500+ 45/1.45 is "better," but either looks like a good bet at this point.
I suppose I got a bit lazy after I got my own XP-M.
It also seems, as dotZIP states, that the processor runs at 35W and naturally 1.35V, in which case it could indeed be a good overclocker. There are reports of 2.5-2.6 GHz with it, no small feat considering the price. I suppose the question would be rather 2200+ 35/1.35 or 2500+ 45/1.45 is "better," but either looks like a good bet at this point.
I suppose I got a bit lazy after I got my own XP-M.
Tough decision...
Basically you're looking at a stock 1.667 mhZ processor at 1.35 volts (the 2200+)
Or a stock 1.8 ghZ processor at 1.45 volts (the 2400+)...
It's 133 mhZ difference, but two whole voltage notchs higher on the 2400+... I'll bet it won't take the 2200+ two extra voltage notches just to overclock it 133 mhZ, so it's probably going to be the higher quality chip.
So yeah, my vote is for the mobile 2200+ (the Barton core 512K cache one, of course. Whatever you do, don't get the 256k one.)
However, I doubt you'd be disapointed with either one. Your friend saying one will overclock "a lot better" than the other is wrong, IMHO. If the 2200+ is faster, it won't be by much.
Just built a rig for my girlfriend with the mobile 2400+ @ 200 * 11 (3200+ speed), 1.7 volts. It'll go higher, but this is kind of a long term rig for her, so I'm not fully maxing out the chip. Idles at a cool 29 degrees C and 39 degrees C load (Zalman 7000Al-Cu, generic silver based thermal paste).
Basically you're looking at a stock 1.667 mhZ processor at 1.35 volts (the 2200+)
Or a stock 1.8 ghZ processor at 1.45 volts (the 2400+)...
It's 133 mhZ difference, but two whole voltage notchs higher on the 2400+... I'll bet it won't take the 2200+ two extra voltage notches just to overclock it 133 mhZ, so it's probably going to be the higher quality chip.
So yeah, my vote is for the mobile 2200+ (the Barton core 512K cache one, of course. Whatever you do, don't get the 256k one.)
However, I doubt you'd be disapointed with either one. Your friend saying one will overclock "a lot better" than the other is wrong, IMHO. If the 2200+ is faster, it won't be by much.
Just built a rig for my girlfriend with the mobile 2400+ @ 200 * 11 (3200+ speed), 1.7 volts. It'll go higher, but this is kind of a long term rig for her, so I'm not fully maxing out the chip. Idles at a cool 29 degrees C and 39 degrees C load (Zalman 7000Al-Cu, generic silver based thermal paste).