View Single Post
Unread 09-10-2003, 02:57 PM   #53
jaydee
Put up or Shut Up
 
jaydee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 6,506
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by gone_fishin
I've seen no absolute proof that Cathar ever quantified a difference in performance (other than a rough .5C, well within his margin of error) with his new block over his ww block. If there is a performance increase the source of the increase has not been pinpointed (witness Les's argument on bp flatness from machining differences recently). Cathar's two blocks are a perfect example of why resolution and accuracy are needed for any answers. I seriously doubt he could quantify a difference with his homestyle test equiptment. I believe that a difference has been noted through higher overclocks, but chips sometimes do overclock differently over time (not diffinitive). His block has so many variables to it that I do not see how he could have optimized them all together without SEEING a changed variables effect. That being said there is nothing wrong with applying ones theories through invention but even trial and error has its limits when you cannot identify an error.
He said the Cascade is 2.5C better than the White Water last I heard.

So your basically saying give up on testing? As from everything I have read from you there is no right way to do things no matter what equipment is used....
jaydee is offline   Reply With Quote