Ik zag op Overclockers.com wat stuff over de Celery Report op AnandTech (dat de klavertje-viers beter de overklokken zijn dan de Celerons met Compeq PCB).
Die gozer van Overclockers.com heeft navraag gedaan bij PC Nut, waar ze C300A's verkopen met een 450Mhz garantie. Zijn reactie:
I have just read the article at Anand's site: Although it is an interesting piece, especially with the actual production numbers, by looking at a box full of C300As that have failed to overclock to 450MHz, I can not support this finding. We have about an equal amount of C300As with both type of PCBs (or Symbols) which failed during our testing. Also, as to the COMPEQ PCB he told everyone to stay away from, we have had quite a few which overclocked and were stable at the default 2.0v core voltage."Readers who have responded with data are not yet supporting this finding - This suggestion from John is a good one:
"What would really tell the tale would be specific reports from people who failed to overclock, and see what proportion is from each brand of PCB, then normalize the results by production plant and week."
Unless someone can support the Anand Tech findings with hard data, this looks like a fluke. Thanks to all who are responding with data and to Humphrey at PC Nut for his usual prompt response.
