retail QX9650 first run -> 4400mhz on Intel cooler box

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-15-2007, 02:52 AM
Tancoll

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace-a-Rue

i noticed clubit.com raised the price by $100..it is now $1300 for an OEM version...YIKES!:eek: ;)

You got to remember that the dollar is low now. :)
Cheaper computer products in Europe.
1300 USD is around 900€
11-15-2007, 06:13 AM
PcCI2iminal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aldy402

i know its not a ES, I just wanted to know if it was a cherry picked retail box or a randomly bought one, thats all. chill out bro..
anyway that cooler is only being included in their Extreme lineup... which suckss

It`s not a cherry picked ,I just asked to my supplier for the newest one and he sent a week 39 :D.
and for 4400mhz I did not my best so all the credits goes to Intel and Asus.
11-15-2007, 06:38 AM
PcCI2iminal

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinos22

great tests as always man

love reading your threads :up:

stock cooler looks nice :D

thx mate and I must agree ,the new cooler design for Core2 Extreme is very impressive :)

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1180/034zf1.jpg
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/2518/036ow2.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rovtar

lol

great cpu or even greater cooler:D

how loud is the cooler?

if you want a quiet system do not use the full power hehehe
11-15-2007, 06:48 AM
Ace-a-Rue

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tancoll

You got to remember that the dollar is low now. :)
Cheaper computer products in Europe.
1300 USD is around 900€

no, you miss the point...the price would be set from the very start if it was a devalue problem...it was $1200 for an OEM until they realized that there is a huge demand; so it goes up via the supply-demand rule for any product...just like a barrel of oil is in high demand, or in jeopardy of being disrupted, so we have $100 per barrel.
11-15-2007, 07:05 AM
PcCI2iminal

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsx2

The very first picture says it's retail...

PC, you got a good one. Never pay too much for a good chip but always pay too much for a bad one. Can you notice a difference from your other chips you have had, system seem faster?

with the same clock/ram (quad G0 @ 3.8ghz vs Yorkfield @ 3800mhz) the load time seems to be a bit faster on yorkfield.
11-15-2007, 07:27 AM
PcCI2iminal

Intel cooler box - room temp 19C

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/7631/003us7.jpg
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/9527/imagem2an0.jpg

The real action starts now :) - IFX-14 San Ace 260CFM x 2 - room temp 20C
http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/792/022vn0.jpg

4715mhz-> http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=268490
500FSB-> http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=268491

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2...00mhzpimm8.jpg
11-15-2007, 07:30 AM
Ace-a-Rue

good grief!:shocked: amazing stuff PC!:up:
11-15-2007, 07:34 AM
PcCI2iminal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace-a-Rue

good grief!:shocked: amazing stuff PC!:up:

thx hehehe but I don`t think that IFX-14 is better than Ultra 120 X but I will try to get better scores :)
11-15-2007, 07:45 AM
Ace-a-Rue

i agree with you...a review was done at XS on the IFX-14..i think the summary was one degree of "C" less efficient than the TRUE 120.
11-15-2007, 08:05 AM
Solarfall

damn 4.6ghz :eek: with just air cooling even if its extreme air cooling that oc is very impressive imo.. nicely done PcCI2iminal
11-15-2007, 12:26 PM
xgman

Quote:

Originally Posted by PcCI2iminal

It`s not a cherry picked ,I just asked to my supplier for the newest one and he sent a week 39 :D.

What does the rest of the batch # after the week mean? Mine is a L739A664
11-15-2007, 12:47 PM
Aldy402

i would love to see a video encoding test with this and a Q6600 at the same clock speed.
or any app where we could see the 12mb cache shine.

thanks
11-15-2007, 01:50 PM
PcCI2iminal

Quote:

Originally Posted by xgman

What does the rest of the batch # after the week mean? Mine is a L739A664

I have the same question hehehe but to be honest, I do not believe any more at this batch #, I always pick the newest :D
11-15-2007, 01:56 PM
PcCI2iminal

8800GT @ 750-1850-1000

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/3...ua03263of0.jpg
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/9...0181255ac8.jpg
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/9...0616443ej6.jpg
11-15-2007, 02:09 PM
jmmtn4aj

Good.. god!
11-15-2007, 02:17 PM
CoW]8(0)

Isn't 1.656V a ridiculous Vcore? Especially for air cooling?

And to make things worse, the 45nms have lower voltage maximums than the 65nm.
11-15-2007, 02:45 PM
nachthymnen

True power!!!:eek: :D
11-15-2007, 03:22 PM
PcCI2iminal

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoW]8(0)

Isn't 1.656V a ridiculous Vcore? Especially for air cooling?

And to make things worse, the 45nms have lower voltage maximums than the 65nm.

and 39c per core soundz ridiculous ?
:D
I can not tell you if it is accurate or not but the base of the sink isn't hot.

nachthymnen

You will love it my friend :)
11-15-2007, 03:25 PM
XS Janus

Quote:

Originally Posted by railer

And what makes you says that? Nehalem even @ stock should be at least 2x as fast. From what i know it will have 3x bandwide then curent cpu's. It's to early to know what Nehalem will bring. But i think you will be suprised how fast it is. I'm a bit sceptical how MMC will do at sub zero.

Anyway retail @ 4.4G is plain sick for now, that's 4 cores fo you over 4G's on air 24/7:up:

From your words to Gods and Intels ears, my friend.
I just made that assumption based on my thinking of what "normal" advances in speed between architectures could be.
But judging how good theese babies are right now I wouldnt be surprised if they decide to pump up stock speeds in 2nd release of 45nm quads.
11-15-2007, 03:55 PM
nemrod

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoW]8(0)

Isn't 1.656V a ridiculous Vcore? Especially for air cooling?

Some website reports a power consumption of about 65W at 3GHz and 1.2V (full), so 65*1,656*1,656/(1,2*1,2)*4,5/3 give 185W, a little bit high but not sure it's so much for air :shrug:

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoW]8(0)

And to make things worse, the 45nms have lower voltage maximums than the 65nm.

It is not clear for me. Thicker oxide, less leakage... :shrug:
11-15-2007, 04:06 PM
CrashOv3r1De

Awesome results!!! Any problems with the mobo?
11-15-2007, 04:36 PM
oscar3d

Anyone thinking of or already LAPPED a QX9650?

Is it worthy? I'm getting mine and I already got a lapped TRUE 120
11-15-2007, 05:38 PM
JAG87

Quote:

Originally Posted by PcCI2iminal

and 39c per core soundz ridiculous ?
:D
I can not tell you if it is accurate or not but the base of the sink isn't hot.

nachthymnen

You will love it my friend :)

PC the vcc max for yorkfields from the intel white paper is 1.45v.

1.65v is far far too much. in proportion its like running 1.7 - 1.8v through a 65nm. yes the temperatures are nice, thats because of the hi-k and low thermal dissipation, but you are completely destroying that cpu.

now that we have assessed your insanity, can you please show us the max overclock that is at least 1h prime stable. that would be awesome, cheers mate :clap:
11-15-2007, 06:04 PM
oscar3d

Cool, now we need to know if we can push it to 4Ghz with the lowest VCORE possible.

Can you try that and tell us?
11-15-2007, 06:22 PM
Loque

is it safe to run it at those high voltages even under low temperatures for 24/7 usage ?

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page