PCMech Forums - View Single Post

PardeGT · 10-09-2001, 03:13 PM

I was reading some online celeron info and someone mentioned that celerons without L2 cache are better overclockers than those with. He said disabling the cache will help overclocking and increase stability while doing so. He also said this one one of the main reasons Intel put cache on the celeron (besides a selling point)- to limit their overclockability.

Is this true or a load of crap? I know the celeron 300a's had cache and were of the best celeron overclockers.

From above posts:
Does anyone know what the system2 temp is actually measuring?

10-09-2001, 03:13 PM	#6
PardeGT Mechanical Guru Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Husker Country Posts: 1,472	I was reading some online celeron info and someone mentioned that celerons without L2 cache are better overclockers than those with. He said disabling the cache will help overclocking and increase stability while doing so. He also said this one one of the main reasons Intel put cache on the celeron (besides a selling point)- to limit their overclockability. Is this true or a load of crap? I know the celeron 300a's had cache and were of the best celeron overclockers. From above posts: Does anyone know what the system2 temp is actually measuring? __________________ If you really want to understand - try changing it. Sys specs: NZXT Lexa_Asus P5E_E6750 2.66Ghz_GSkill 2GB PC6400_Mushkin 2GB PC6400_WD SE16 250GB_Pioneer 16x slot dvd_Pioneer 16x dvdrw Mitsumi 1.44_ATI x1600pro 512mb_Linksys WRT54GS_Samsung R237W LCD_Altec Lansing 641_WinXP PRO SP2