On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:01:51 -1000, "Owner"
<Owner@noemail.com> wrote:

>
>"catchme" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
>news:evfuj.52358$Ly.50040@pd7urf1no...
>> Lew wrote:
>>> "catchme" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
>>> news:gV6uj.58853$FA.5994@pd7urf2no...
>>> ...i recommend a
>>>> motherboard that supports AMD.
>>>
>>>
>>> LOL .. Right now Intel blows AMD out of the water.
>> intel always beats amd from pure clock speed,
>
>
>>but amd are far more stable.
>
>For overclocking maybe, but not as a stock processor right out of the box.
>


If both are only conservatively overclocked - given enough
but not too much voltage, kept cool enough, and tested for
stability, then they're both stable overclocked. However,
it should be noted that the typical Intel chip has more
overclocking headroom than AMD's alternative does at this
point in time. For example in the lower end E2xxx or E4xxx
series you can come near or even exceed 200% of the stock
clockspeed without exceptional efforts, just having a decent
aftermarket heatsink.