I don't even know why I bother reading THG's "techie" articles anymore, but here's my input anyway:
1. Stumbled through 4 typo's/grammar/logic errors on the first page alone...then I just stopped counting. ("Intel, for example, dreams of the "digital home," yet only delivers components that would last long without active cooling controls."
2. "This involves opening the multipliers, which only these processors allow." Wrong.
3. As sthayashi mentioned, they obviously don't know that there are several windows/linux apps and mobo-utilities that allow on-the-fly vcore adjustments. More quality research from the boys at THG. Hint to THG: Try Google.
4. No discussion of the ways in which actual XP-M's are different from regular XP's.
They pretty clearly miss the whole concept that reducing vcore is much more useful than reducing the Mhz. In my opinion, the only reason to underclock is to get a better undervolt. They don't even appear to have thought about the idea of undervolting at stock speeds.
"Zalman's CPNS 700A-CU" I'm sure Zalman loves the mis-identification of their product. More quality editing from THG.
I like the total lack of information on where there "Power consumption" numbers come from. You cannot use an ammeter to meaure power consumption in an XP or a P4. (power is drawn from multiple lines, in unknown proportions, depending on the mobo)Useless.
Lol....I bet I won't get a christmas card from Tom this year.