90nm vs .13micron

Status
Not open for further replies.
On 90nm the transistors are much smaller (90nm). Because they are smaller, more transistors can be added, resulting in less voltage requirements and higher frequencies.
 
Basicly what nubius said. Lower voltages produce less heat so you can oc higher. If you dont want to overclock and on a budget then .130 is better.
 
Sevoma said:
Basicly what nubius said. Lower voltages produce less heat so you can oc higher. If you dont want to overclock and on a budget then .130 is better.

heat plays a small factor in how far you can overclock.
 
Another thing xteam02001, Newcastles only have 640mb cache total.
So do Winchester cores mate. :p

The only Athlon 64 proccesors with larger caches are the Athlon-FX's.
 
No, clawhammers and sledgehammers. 3200 Claw/Sledge/3400/3500. They have variant cores.
 
SanToast, did you just say heat plays a small role....? Heat has everything to do with OC.... Heat is what limits you. Heat is the biggest problem.
 
Heat is not the limit of overclocking.

You can have a CPU running at five degrees celcius and the frequency will still be limited. If you go pass this limit, the data will not process correctly because it is too frequent for the CPU's architecture.

Check it:

Remember the review on Tom's Hardware Guide where 5.x GHz was achieved? The CPU's temperature was way down in the minus, but they were still restricted to 5.x GHz, because when the frequency was pushed higher, the data processed became corrupt.
 
That has nothing to do with what i said. I said (heat as everything to do with OC). Not the 5ghz architecture limit. Temperature has everything to do with OC. You would be lucky to reach the processors limit. Prove me wrong, try OC a CPU at 100 degrees celcius. Burn your processor up, and tell me (heat plays a small role).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom