Jens Kilian wrote:
> As I keep telling people: A processor rated for 300MHz is a processor which
> has ALREADY failed at 450MHz, during the final test at the fab.
> 
My 300mHz Celeron has been running continuously at 464mHz for over two
months. I had to bump the core voltage to 2.3 and use a heat sink with
three cooling fans. 

I think what you are saying used to be true. Today however, marketing 
probably plays a greater role. I'm sure Intel doesn't want an $80
Celeron competing with the much more expensive and profitable
Pentium II 450.

> My 300mHz Celeron has been running continuously at 464mHz for over two
> months. I had to bump the core voltage to 2.3 and use a heat sink with
> three cooling fans. 
> 
> I think what you are saying used to be true. Today however, marketing 
> probably plays a greater role. I'm sure Intel doesn't want an $80
> Celeron competing with the much more expensive and profitable
> Pentium II 450.

I've been told that there is no official higher-speed version of the Celeron,
so this may be true; I've no idea.  However, if there IS a higher rated model
of the same processor line, my original remark will apply (the lower-speed
chips are those that have failed a "speed binning" test).

Good luck,

        Jens.
--
mailto:jjk@acm.org                 phone:+49-7031-14-7698 (HP TELNET 778-7698)
  http://www.bawue.de/~jjk/          fax:+49-7031-14-7351
PGP:       06 04 1C 35 7B DC 1F 26 As the air to a bird, or the sea to a fish,