Hardware update

[Daniel Spies]

<cace82136f1706f0c3d18ebf0d29ea65 at localhost> <c16a574a0804090724v353870ebgfd51b64744d6f72d at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <67032eb0b6d22cc87a7395ffb988a400 at localhost>
X-Sender: daniel.spies at fuceekay.com
Received: from 62.159.37.130 [62.159.37.130] with HTTP/1.1 (POST); Wed, 09 Apr
	2008 17:03:53 +0200
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I see. Thank you!

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 16:24:53 +0200, thomasg <thomas at gstaedtner.net> wrote:
> It was on the list a few weeks ago - the main reason is the ram divisor -
> clocking the cpu higher means clocking the ram lower, means lowering the
> total throughput. So it's a question of requirements. Lowering the
> ramclock
> for having the cpu at a higher speed is not worth it.
> Another point is the power consumption at 500 MHz. Not worth it, too.
>