I just looked in the manual...seems there is already support for RAID, but I don't know if it's in the BIOS or on a utility CD which I don't have.
All the stuff about potential problems with overclocking sounds like a hassle with a lot of gray areas to me.
Back to the 3000+ vs. 3400 (not sure if that gets a '+' or not) question...
Is a 3400 faster than 3000+ (generally speaking), or would finding a 3400 2.4 GHz lean toward the overclocked 3000+ advice by virtue of upping the clock multiplier on a processor already rated for 2400? The RAM is PC3200. The clock is at 200 MHz now.
I'm not sure I understand the whole picture, and the last time I messed with clock multipliers they were MB jumpers. I didn't see an obvious x10 setting to link '2000 MHz' and '200 MHz', but the BIOS has a Super-somethin' feature they describe as 'good for overclocking at your own risk', so there may be another name or parameter for that feature.
Maybe it's wishful thinking, but it seems like a 3400(+?) at 2400 MHz would= faster CPU without the RAM being pushed into another temperature category. I guess I could say I want to consider conservative options that don't require extensive tweaking and watching my back for overheating...the 3700 price + hard drive starts to make the upgrade cost higher than might make sense.
Someone else told me reloading the OS might make a bigger difference anyway
04:00 PM by