Mobile XP-M 2500+ or Mobile XP-M 2600+

I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
the better choice.

Comments? Thanks.

"the6carrules" wrote in message
om...
I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
the better choice.

Comments? Thanks.

I've got a $76 XP-M 2400+ running at 200x12---2.4Ghz. 1.675v

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 04:54:27 +0000, Kill Bill wrote:


"the6carrules" wrote in message
om...
I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
the better choice.

Comments? Thanks.

I've got a $76 XP-M 2400+ running at 200x12---2.4Ghz. 1.675v

Why are you bothering to reply to the above post if you are not going to
attempt to answer his/her question? We really don't care about your
XP-M-2400...

Larry Gagnon

"Larry Gagnon" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 04:54:27 +0000, Kill Bill wrote:


"the6carrules" wrote in message
om...
I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
the better choice.

Comments? Thanks.

I've got a $76 XP-M 2400+ running at 200x12---2.4Ghz. 1.675v

Why are you bothering to reply to the above post if you are not going to
attempt to answer his/her question? We really don't care about your
XP-M-2400...

Larry Gagnon


Wow, really felt like going out of your way to flame someone today huh? As
it might not be obvious to everyone, (or at least Larry here) any mobile XP
can be said to overclock as good as the others so the "best bang for the
buck" as the question was posed just might be the least expensive one.
They're all the same core. Is that clear enough for you ****o? Find
something better to do.

I went for the 2600+. Eventhough the chips have the same core, I think they
are separated on quality and you could get a higher overclock at a lower
voltage with the 2600+, so for $10 bucks I would go for it.

It is running at V, but I think with the new BIOS upgrade I
might be able to push it up a bit higher or be able to drop the core down.

If you check the other posts, I have loaded the Nov 2004, DFI Bios and the
system seems to be Prime95 stable at a lower core voltage at the moment it
is running 1.0 V lower.

Pete

"the6carrules" wrote in message
om...
I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
the better choice.

Comments? Thanks.

"Larry Gagnon" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 04:54:27 +0000, Kill Bill wrote:


"the6carrules" wrote in message
om...
I found a mobile XP-M 2500+ for $83 and the mobile XP-M 2600+ for $93.
Which one is best bang for the buck? I always see the 2500 as the
favorite, but for another $10 I'm thinking the 2600+ on paper seems
the better choice.

Comments? Thanks.

I've got a $76 XP-M 2400+ running at 200x12---2.4Ghz. 1.675v

Why are you bothering to reply to the above post if you are not going to
attempt to answer his/her question? We really don't care about your
XP-M-2400...


That's a bit harsh, Larry. He does make a point that his cheaper mobile CPU
goes well. If he can get the CPU to 2.5GHz without excessive Vcore then it
could be a candidate for "best bang for the buck".