You should probably see this

[liebremx]

Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Tell me something, have you been abudcted by aliens or does that tinfoil hat protect you?

He's one of the 4400

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: liebremx

Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Tell me something, have you been abudcted by aliens or does that tinfoil hat protect you?

He's one of the 4400

The show was supposed to be called "The 4401", but they had transporter problems.
He was stuck in the buffer too long....

 

[liebremx]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: liebremx

Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Tell me something, have you been abudcted by aliens or does that tinfoil hat protect you?

He's one of the 4400

The show was supposed to be called "The 4401", but they had transporter problems.
He was stuck in the buffer too long....

He talked the abducters into believing that their petaflop cluster used for the transporter could be replaced by his overclocked A64 3000 hence the problems in his way back

 

[OcHungry]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: OcHungry

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: OcHungry
for example it shows X6800 Cinebench's score to be 940 and fx62 at 749. My A64 3000 can do better than that. just compare it w/ anandtech's benchmarks and you?ll see what I mean.

Can you show a screenshot of your A64 3000 doing over 940 in 32-bit Cinebench?? I'd love to see that. You must have an A64 from the planet Krypton.

I was referring to FX62 low score (a cooked score by that web site). Yes my A64 3000 does better than what that website showed for FX62. that's why right away I suspected the intention of the review. Hell I doubted Anandtech's (have to know the numbers to see through) cooked a little in first time review. But later Anand changed the fx62 # to more realistic. I did not know there are review sites out there sell their own mother (or wife) for the money. Hardware zone is one of those pimps.

So let's see the screenshot of your mystical/magical/super A64 3000+ beating the FX-62 in the 32-bit Cinebench CPU test. The 3000+ will only be able to run the single CPU test so will get NOWHERE NEAR the FX62 score. Hardwarezone shows 749 for the Fx62 and anand shows 783(not a drastic difference and that's for the multi cpu test) so let's see your 3000+ beat even the 749 which you claim is too low.

No problem. But understand the logic and do little math. Take a look at the A64 3000 Cinebench )single core processor). The score is 453 for single. you know Cinebench's double is a ratio between 1.85 to 1.9
Taking the lower ratio:
1.8x453 = 815>749.
Or, lets look at anand's FX62 single score = 380
Mine is 453, which is >380.
Question?
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/218/08012006051952um1.jpg
Oh BTW take a look at my idle temp w/ stock cooling. its 21c. 1/2 of any conroe's Idle temp w/ creative cooling.
Question?
Be real. Stop pushing Intel junks. Not too many are fooled.
Just roam aroun any forum and see the poor suckers complaing about " cant OC", "My temp is too high", " My comp freezes",
"This Gigabyte you recommended sure has a lot of bugs to fix"
" When are we going to see a decent and inexpensive board",
" I spent $1200 and I should have stayed w/ my old s939"
You poor suckers who keep insulting me w/ your foul mouth, I feel for you- You've been had and is frusterated beast. But hey you should have not trusted the junks in the first place.

 

[theteamaqua]

it didnt bench Conroe at 3.37Ghz vs FX at its maxed clock which is about 200MHz more than stock

 

[theteamaqua]

also it didnt do GeForce 7900 GTX SLI X6800 vs FX 62 with SLI ....

u cant comprae to cpus directly especially i ngames if u dont have same GPU

 

[Capt Caveman]

Please lock this thread and give OcHungry a vacation. Obviously, he's trolling b/c no one can be this stupid in real life. And all this has become is a pissing contest.

 

[OcHungry]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Please lock this thread and give OcHungry a vacation. Obviously, he's trolling b/c no one can be this stupid in real life. And all this has become is a pissing contest.

Go back to your cave and stay there.

 

[OcHungry]

Folks lets just not get on tangent and be rude and offensive to a fellow member. Look at this argument w/ a fair frame of mind and don?t get irritated if you don?t like what you see or hear. I have refrained myself from giving those who resort to insult and profanity and have not reported you to anandtech (yet). But don?t go too far offending people here w/ your insults because I am sure a mod will have enough of you and your rudeness.
Anyways. I went ahead and put some numbers together for you. take a look at it and be fair please.
Below is a screenshot of my latest overclock and Cinebench benchmark. As you can see I am not too far off the Cinebench Hardware zone conducted on E6300 @ 3.36ghz.
My A64 4400 x2 is overclocked to 3036mhz and the Cinebench scores improved quite a bit.
Here is my analysis:
Hardware zone's
E6300 @ 3.36ghz $185
DDR2 1000 $225
DQ6 Mobo $226
Vid card $400
memory speed @ 480mhz
total $1036
Vcore @ 1.60v
Cooling? unknown. But must be adequate to be able to cool a vcore like that
Cinebech multi CPU 1076 Don?t know why the score for single CPU was not mentioned

Mine:
A64 4400 x2 @ 3036ghz $236
DDR 400 $56(2x256) or $115 (2x512)
Asrock Dual Sata mobo $66
GF7600GT $114
total $531(w/ 2x512)
Cooling: Ninja $ 39
memory speed @ 276mhz
Cinbench multi CPU 943 single score @ 503

The price performance:
Pay 95% more ($1036/$531) to get 14% improvement (in Cinebench)
My memory speed is almost ½ Hardwarezone's. I don?t know if I use 10x multi and better memory to run 1:1 @ 300mhz can help w/ cinebench score, but I am sure it will improve other applications.
Wouldn?t you rather save the $505 ($1036-$531) and spend it on something else? a monitor perhaps?
I did. I bought a 22" LCD for $350 shipping included and still have $155 left that can buy another vid card to make a SLI. Or just put it in the bank. I don?t think 15% improvement is worth $500. That is almost the price of another machine to build.
Bottom line is this: Core 2 is not kicking AMD's azz as some of you led to believe.
Now don?t let above piss you off because you went and spent $1000 on core 2 system and thing I am bashing you. That's your choice and more power to you. You did good and had the money to spend on the latest technology. But don?t be so hyped up about it and scorn those who buy cheaper machine that happens to be an AMD. that does not make you smarter and him dumb., because he spends $500 less o a set up 15% slower.
The chances are both system will perform just as equally.
Hardwarezone has the vcore @ 1.60v. Do you know how hard it is to cool that system?
I see people here complaining about Core 2's temp @ 1.40v vcore.
Yes hardware zone can overclock his E6300 to 3.36ghz. Can you? and what motherboard? would you use that chip @ 1.60v vcore 24/7 Or play game for an hour?
Think about it. Hardwarezone's benchmarks and review is unrealistic and the overclock w/ 1.60v is insane and impractical. what kind of cooling do they use for that 1.60 v chip anyway?
Enough said. you believe what you want and buy whatever pleases you. I know I spend my money wise and I don?t regret a second, or feel I?ve missed any performance.
Again, if you'd like to respond to this post, refrain yourself from bad words and be decent to your fellow member when you write.
Thanks.

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/4730/09302006033722fk5.jpg

 

[herbiehancock]

This thread has been quite a hilarous read. Does the Oc gent honestly believe and expect anyone else to believe that every single hardware stie on the internet has been bought off by Intel? Talk about conspiracy theories....

What I see is site after site replicating tests showing essentially the same results that the C2D, such as the E6300, when OC'd, outperforms anything AMD currently has in its stable. A nasty truth, but no worse than when AMD was spanking Intel for the last few years.

To disregard and belittle the overwhelming evidence out there that Conroe is a spectacular performing cpu, performing better than anything else currently being produced for the consumer, is laughable at best, completely ignorant at worst......or maybe just showing there are rabid Intel haters who refuse to admit their precious company has been upstaged for now. I've heard of and seen denial, but Oc's is bordering on insanity.

 

[herbiehancock]

I've a question about your setup comparisons....................why on earth did you give a $400 video card for the Conroe setup and only a $116 video card for your setup? To be fair, you'd either have to set up the Intel system with the same $114 video card or add another $286 to your system, bringing your system's total up to over $800.....just to be fair.

Hardware Zone used a Thermaltake Mini Typhoon cooler on all of their cups during their OC testing, if you'd gone through some researching otehr articles that centered on their testing. There is one that is related to the "big" Conroe overclocking article in which their testbed componentry included the above mentioned cpu cooler in all their Conroe vs. AMD testing. Interestingly, I've been seeing LOTS of people achieving 3GHz and above with their E6300 cpus with no thermal problems whatsoever......and not surprising, too, since the Conroe uses much less wattage than the current AMD designs.

Gotta face it, painful or not, the current Intel design is just flat out faster in work or play than anything AMD produces currently, and it OC's much better, too.

By the by, how are you chilling your OC'd cpu to 21C on air? Is your room THAT cold? It's impossible to cool your cpu on air below ambient air temps, so you must be living in quite a cool environment......must suck to have to chill yourself so much to get such low temps from your cpu.

 

[markymoo]

hes in denial.

he spending $1000 and getting burnt from $300 cpu.

it gotta hurt.


its the only logical explanation.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: herbiehancock
This thread has been quite a hilarous read. Does the Oc gent honestly believe and expect anyone else to believe that every single hardware stie on the internet has been bought off by Intel? Talk about conspiracy theories....

What I see is site after site replicating tests showing essentially the same results that the C2D, such as the E6300, when OC'd, outperforms anything AMD currently has in its stable. A nasty truth, but no worse than when AMD was spanking Intel for the last few years.

To disregard and belittle the overwhelming evidence out there that Conroe is a spectacular performing cpu, performing better than anything else currently being produced for the consumer, is laughable at best, completely ignorant at worst......or maybe just showing there are rabid Intel haters who refuse to admit their precious company has been upstaged for now. I've heard of and seen denial, but Oc's is bordering on insanity.

Well said. And the fact OC referred to Core 2 Duo as "Intel Junk", speaks volumes about where his mind is. Lost in AMD.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: OcHungry
No problem. But understand the logic and do little math. Take a look at the A64 3000 Cinebench )single core processor). The score is 453 for single. you know Cinebench's double is a ratio between 1.85 to 1.9
Taking the lower ratio:
1.8x453 = 815>749.
Or, lets look at anand's FX62 single score = 380
Mine is 453, which is >380.
Question?
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/218/08012006051952um1.jpg
Oh BTW take a look at my idle temp w/ stock cooling. its 21c. 1/2 of any conroe's Idle temp w/ creative cooling.
Question?
Be real. Stop pushing Intel junks. Not too many are fooled.
Just roam aroun any forum and see the poor suckers complaing about " cant OC", "My temp is too high", " My comp freezes",
"This Gigabyte you recommended sure has a lot of bugs to fix"
" When are we going to see a decent and inexpensive board",
" I spent $1200 and I should have stayed w/ my old s939"
You poor suckers who keep insulting me w/ your foul mouth, I feel for you- You've been had and is frusterated beast. But hey you should have not trusted the junks in the first place.

YOU ARE COMPARING 64-BIT to 32-BIT!!! IN ANADTECH's REVIEW THEY ARE USING 32-BIT CINEBENCH SO YOUR COMPARISON IS USELESS. RIGHT IN YOUR SCREENSHOT IT SAYS 64-bit VERSION OF CINEBENCH. Are you finished yet? :disgust:

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: harpoon84
I don't understand why OcHungry keeps embarrasing himself.

His 'mighty' 4400+ @ 2.8GHz will get utterly OWNED by any C2D @ 3GHz, let alone a 3.5 or 4GHz one.

He keeps talking about his 'special calculations and theorys' because he has no benchmarks to back himself up. He is a fraud, plain and simple.

He's a troll, that's why. Or maybe he's being paid which makes him yet another clueless viral marketter. I don't think he is one, however, due to the fact that the marketters we had promoting the KillerNIC weren't half as bad as OCHungry.

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Please lock this thread and give OcHungry a vacation. Obviously, he's trolling b/c no one can be this stupid in real life. And all this has become is a pissing contest.

Seconded.

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: OcHungry
Folks lets just not get on tangent and be rude and offensive to a fellow member. Look at this argument w/ a fair frame of mind and don?t get irritated if you don?t like what you see or hear. I have refrained myself from giving those who resort to insult and profanity and have not reported you to anandtech (yet). But don?t go too far offending people here w/ your insults because I am sure a mod will have enough of you and your rudeness.
Anyways. I went ahead and put some numbers together for you. take a look at it and be fair please.
Below is a screenshot of my latest overclock and Cinebench benchmark. As you can see I am not too far off the Cinebench Hardware zone conducted on E6300 @ 3.36ghz.
My A64 4400 x2 is overclocked to 3036mhz and the Cinebench scores improved quite a bit.
Here is my analysis:
Hardware zone's
E6300 @ 3.36ghz $185
DDR2 1000 $225
DQ6 Mobo $226
Vid card $400
memory speed @ 480mhz
total $1036
Vcore @ 1.60v
Cooling? unknown. But must be adequate to be able to cool a vcore like that
Cinebech multi CPU 1076 Don?t know why the score for single CPU was not mentioned

Mine:
A64 4400 x2 @ 3036ghz $236
DDR 400 $56(2x256) or $115 (2x512)
Asrock Dual Sata mobo $66
GF7600GT $114
total $531(w/ 2x512)
Cooling: Ninja $ 39
memory speed @ 276mhz
Cinbench multi CPU 943 single score @ 503

The price performance:
Pay 95% more ($1036/$531) to get 14% improvement (in Cinebench)
My memory speed is almost ½ Hardwarezone's. I don?t know if I use 10x multi and better memory to run 1:1 @ 300mhz can help w/ cinebench score, but I am sure it will improve other applications.
Wouldn?t you rather save the $505 ($1036-$531) and spend it on something else? a monitor perhaps?
I did. I bought a 22" LCD for $350 shipping included and still have $155 left that can buy another vid card to make a SLI. Or just put it in the bank. I don?t think 15% improvement is worth $500. That is almost the price of another machine to build.
Bottom line is this: Core 2 is not kicking AMD's azz as some of you led to believe.
Now don?t let above piss you off because you went and spent $1000 on core 2 system and thing I am bashing you. That's your choice and more power to you. You did good and had the money to spend on the latest technology. But don?t be so hyped up about it and scorn those who buy cheaper machine that happens to be an AMD. that does not make you smarter and him dumb., because he spends $500 less o a set up 15% slower.
The chances are both system will perform just as equally.
Hardwarezone has the vcore @ 1.60v. Do you know how hard it is to cool that system?
I see people here complaining about Core 2's temp @ 1.40v vcore.
Yes hardware zone can overclock his E6300 to 3.36ghz. Can you? and what motherboard? would you use that chip @ 1.60v vcore 24/7 Or play game for an hour?
Think about it. Hardwarezone's benchmarks and review is unrealistic and the overclock w/ 1.60v is insane and impractical. what kind of cooling do they use for that 1.60 v chip anyway?
Enough said. you believe what you want and buy whatever pleases you. I know I spend my money wise and I don?t regret a second, or feel I?ve missed any performance.
Again, if you'd like to respond to this post, refrain yourself from bad words and be decent to your fellow member when you write.
Thanks.

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/4730/09302006033722fk5.jpg

LOL@ the price comparison

in fact: BOTH systems can have the same hardware
AND C2D will still be CHEAPER and perform BETTER

A64 4400 x2 @ 3036ghz $236
DDR 400 $56(2x256) or $115 (2x512)
Asrock Dual Sata mobo $66
GF7600GT $114
total $531(w/ 2x512)
Cooling: Ninja $ 39
memory speed @ 276mhz



Core 2 Duo E6300 -$180
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115005
ASROCK DUAL MOBO -$55
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813157092
DDR 400 $56(2x256) or $115 (2x512)
GF7600GT $114
total $464!!!!!!!(w/ 2x512)
Cooling: Ninja $ 39


please shutup now

saved you $67


LOL

so now youre going to probably argue that prices on the 4400+ have changed, maybe they dropped right?.... NOPE


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103546


$245

thats another $11 I just saved going for C2D WITH BETTER PERFORMANCE a total savings of $78 with the same exact hardware, but better performance in.... EVERYTHING


OR better yet I can take $44 of that $78 I saved and put it into a E6400, which will thrash the Sh!t out of a 4400+ X2, and you know what? ill still have $34 In my pocket.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115004

E6400 $224

whats more intresting is: your dual board you mentioned is $4 more than what you posted http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813157097 a total savings of......... $82!

"Pay 95% more ($1036/$531) to get 14% improvement (in Cinebench)"

WRONG, you paid %13 more and the similar C2d system gets %14 improvement in cinebench, ($531 [4400] vs $464 [E6300]).


If you really wanted.... I could add the extra $15 in price difference from the mobo and your 4400 on newegg (from your original price in your system) and you will be paying %16 more and the C2D system will STILL have %14 better performance (in cinebench), but I think I wont... youve had enough ownage already. The truth is, C2D is putting a major beatdown on AMD.

 

[NoStateofMind]

OcHungry = OWNED!

 

[n19htmare]

I like how he says that how do you know you'll get 3300mhz...?

You know what dude, I have more of chance getting 3200+mhz on a E6300 than getting even close to 3000Mhz on an AMD lol....

It works both ways, how do i know ill get 3000 with 4400+?

This is where you change your screen name, act obolivious and attack yourself to make your new self look good.

 

[swtethan]

edited my post for more pwnage!!!


(2 posts up)

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: OcHungry

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: harpoon84
I don't understand why OcHungry keeps embarrasing himself.

His 'mighty' 4400+ @ 2.8GHz will get utterly OWNED by any C2D @ 3GHz, let alone a 3.5 or 4GHz one.

He keeps talking about his 'special calculations and theorys' because he has no benchmarks to back himself up. He is a fraud, plain and simple.

Aye and lets see his system beat This Cinebench run

Is that yours?
what speed and what cpu?

Yes that's mine, using the specs in my siggy.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: OcHungry

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: OcHungry

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: OcHungry
for example it shows X6800 Cinebench's score to be 940 and fx62 at 749. My A64 3000 can do better than that. just compare it w/ anandtech's benchmarks and you?ll see what I mean.

Can you show a screenshot of your A64 3000 doing over 940 in 32-bit Cinebench?? I'd love to see that. You must have an A64 from the planet Krypton.

I was referring to FX62 low score (a cooked score by that web site). Yes my A64 3000 does better than what that website showed for FX62. that's why right away I suspected the intention of the review. Hell I doubted Anandtech's (have to know the numbers to see through) cooked a little in first time review. But later Anand changed the fx62 # to more realistic. I did not know there are review sites out there sell their own mother (or wife) for the money. Hardware zone is one of those pimps.

So let's see the screenshot of your mystical/magical/super A64 3000+ beating the FX-62 in the 32-bit Cinebench CPU test. The 3000+ will only be able to run the single CPU test so will get NOWHERE NEAR the FX62 score. Hardwarezone shows 749 for the Fx62 and anand shows 783(not a drastic difference and that's for the multi cpu test) so let's see your 3000+ beat even the 749 which you claim is too low.

No problem. But understand the logic and do little math. Take a look at the A64 3000 Cinebench )single core processor). The score is 453 for single. you know Cinebench's double is a ratio between 1.85 to 1.9
Taking the lower ratio:
1.8x453 = 815>749.
Or, lets look at anand's FX62 single score = 380
Mine is 453, which is >380.
Question?
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/218/08012006051952um1.jpg
Oh BTW take a look at my idle temp w/ stock cooling. its 21c. 1/2 of any conroe's Idle temp w/ creative cooling.
Question?
Be real. Stop pushing Intel junks. Not too many are fooled.
Just roam aroun any forum and see the poor suckers complaing about " cant OC", "My temp is too high", " My comp freezes",
"This Gigabyte you recommended sure has a lot of bugs to fix"
" When are we going to see a decent and inexpensive board",
" I spent $1200 and I should have stayed w/ my old s939"
You poor suckers who keep insulting me w/ your foul mouth, I feel for you- You've been had and is frusterated beast. But hey you should have not trusted the junks in the first place.

Yeah I guess only smart people spend more money on a slower CPU. Good call :laugh:

 

[harpoon84]

LOL this thread is still going!

OcHungry is like the infamous Iraqi Information Minister.

http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

Quote from that site (with a minor edit )

"In an age of spin, al-Sahaf (edit: OcHungry) offers feeling and authenticity. His message is consistent -- unshakeable, in fact, no matter the evidence -- but he commands daily attention by his on-the-spot, invective-rich variations on the theme. His lunatic counterfactual art is more appealing than the banal awfulness of the Reliable Sources. He is a Method actor in a production that will close in a couple of days. He stands superior to truth."

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: OcHungry

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: OcHungry

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: OcHungry
for example it shows X6800 Cinebench's score to be 940 and fx62 at 749. My A64 3000 can do better than that. just compare it w/ anandtech's benchmarks and you?ll see what I mean.

Can you show a screenshot of your A64 3000 doing over 940 in 32-bit Cinebench?? I'd love to see that. You must have an A64 from the planet Krypton.

I was referring to FX62 low score (a cooked score by that web site). Yes my A64 3000 does better than what that website showed for FX62. that's why right away I suspected the intention of the review. Hell I doubted Anandtech's (have to know the numbers to see through) cooked a little in first time review. But later Anand changed the fx62 # to more realistic. I did not know there are review sites out there sell their own mother (or wife) for the money. Hardware zone is one of those pimps.

So let's see the screenshot of your mystical/magical/super A64 3000+ beating the FX-62 in the 32-bit Cinebench CPU test. The 3000+ will only be able to run the single CPU test so will get NOWHERE NEAR the FX62 score. Hardwarezone shows 749 for the Fx62 and anand shows 783(not a drastic difference and that's for the multi cpu test) so let's see your 3000+ beat even the 749 which you claim is too low.

No problem. But understand the logic and do little math. Take a look at the A64 3000 Cinebench )single core processor). The score is 453 for single. you know Cinebench's double is a ratio between 1.85 to 1.9
Taking the lower ratio:
1.8x453 = 815>749.
Or, lets look at anand's FX62 single score = 380
Mine is 453, which is >380.
Question?
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/218/08012006051952um1.jpg
Oh BTW take a look at my idle temp w/ stock cooling. its 21c. 1/2 of any conroe's Idle temp w/ creative cooling.
Question?
Be real. Stop pushing Intel junks. Not too many are fooled.
Just roam aroun any forum and see the poor suckers complaing about " cant OC", "My temp is too high", " My comp freezes",
"This Gigabyte you recommended sure has a lot of bugs to fix"
" When are we going to see a decent and inexpensive board",
" I spent $1200 and I should have stayed w/ my old s939"
You poor suckers who keep insulting me w/ your foul mouth, I feel for you- You've been had and is frusterated beast. But hey you should have not trusted the junks in the first place.

download everest and show us your temp

only in your world would your cpu be at 21c when your ambient is 26c, THATS AMAZING!! and on stock cooling, LOL!!!!

please try to fool someone else

 

[dexvx]

Thats BS, stock cooling to get a 90nm S939 X2 to 2.9Ghz?

I've read that stupid thread you linked me, and everyone has a $40+ Air Cooling or water cooling to get anywhere near that high. In fact, you're like the first person to suggest that the X2 stock cooler is enough for 2.9Ghz (2x 1MB) on *this* forum.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: dexvx
Thats BS, stock cooling to get a 90nm S939 X2 to 2.9Ghz?

I've read that stupid thread you linked me, and everyone has a $40+ Air Cooling or water cooling to get anywhere near that high. In fact, you're like the first person to suggest that the X2 stock cooler is enough for 2.9Ghz (2x 1MB) on *this* forum.

lol
my Opteron 170 @ 2.75 1.4v had 50C load with a big typhoon and I find it hard to believe that someone would do 2.9 with stock cooling.