Hello all!
I have just recently got around putting up details of eMac 800MHz upgrade to 1.33GHz/1GB/160GB/OSX10.3
http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/eMac/eMac-upgrade.html
As I said there 1.33GHz was not a definite limit but a point when I simply got bored resoldering jumpers. And it IS enough for me!
Do you think this was just a lucky sample or Apple now has to underclock modern efficient CPUs to satisfy low-end Macs production? I guess (as in any manufacturing process) quality of chips constantly and gradually improves and Motorola would not produce "sluggish" chips for a purpose. Having the same line making all the 750MHz - 2GHz range is too expensive logistically?.. Well, that's just my thought.
Could you suggest some application that would push all system to the limit and show how stable it really is? I know from experience that compiling a kernel under Linux is very unforgiving for any CPU-RAM faults but I don't want to install Linux on eMac just for that.
Best wishes!
I have just recently got around putting up details of eMac 800MHz upgrade to 1.33GHz/1GB/160GB/OSX10.3
http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/eMac/eMac-upgrade.html
As I said there 1.33GHz was not a definite limit but a point when I simply got bored resoldering jumpers. And it IS enough for me!
Do you think this was just a lucky sample or Apple now has to underclock modern efficient CPUs to satisfy low-end Macs production? I guess (as in any manufacturing process) quality of chips constantly and gradually improves and Motorola would not produce "sluggish" chips for a purpose. Having the same line making all the 750MHz - 2GHz range is too expensive logistically?.. Well, that's just my thought.
Could you suggest some application that would push all system to the limit and show how stable it really is? I know from experience that compiling a kernel under Linux is very unforgiving for any CPU-RAM faults but I don't want to install Linux on eMac just for that.
Best wishes!