Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmore
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=324Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmore
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=324Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Not going to believe a word about Phenom II until NDA is lifted and there are proper reviews.
Just like the 30k 3DMark06 with Phenom @ 3GHz. :rolleyes:
LoL, yeah i noticed that too, but i attributed it to people thinking jpg's are what they should use, instead of png's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
http://lbrandy.com/blog/wp-content/u...pg_vs_png2.png
Well glad to know now, that those unbelievable results were just that, unbelievable ^^
Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
Oh man, that comic is pure gold. :rofl:
Some interesting facts from here,may be of interest to some people:
Quote:
AMD showcased several demo PCs using different cooling technologies with their new Phenom II X4 processor's on Gigabyte 790GX motherboards. The air cooling setup used a Cooler Master Hyper Z600 heatsink (running pretty quiet), the water/tec cooling had a CoolIT Freezone Elite, the phase change I *think* was a VapoChill, and best of all, an aluminum block for LN2.
Since these first Phenom II processors will be socket AM2+ only, at most a simple BIOS update should be all that is required to ensure full support / compatibility with existing boards.
Quote:
Now, back to the presentation... During the LN2 demo, one of the first questions asked from the crowd was, "Is there a cold bug?"... Everyone got a good chuckle from that. Unlike the current 65nm Phenom's which don't seem to like extreme cold, there seems to be no issues with the Phenom II (booting or running) at very low temperatures. The probe temperature actually got lower than what is in the picture (that's the only picture AMD provided with a temp reading).
Quote:
We are not allowed to give specifics on speeds at this time, but as a generalization one can expect the following stable performance without too much tweaking effort:
* Air: Around 4GHz is a safe area to target with decent aftermarket cooling & mild voltage increase. When I say "around" that means above and below, so don't gripe at me if your CPU won't hit 4GHz, there is no guarantee with overclocking. Also there aren't exactly huge amounts of CPUs out in the wild yet, so observations are somewhat limited.
* LN2: If you were thinking 5GHz, guess again (and guess higher)... It was like the Energizer Bunny commercials... they just keep going, and going, and going. To say in excess of 5GHz is an understatement, but that's about as detailed as I'm allowed. There was another large leap too between what was "stable" and what you could get a CPU-Z screenshot of, so that shows even more promise in the long term as yields will undoubtedly improve.
* Water & Phase Change: Obviously somewhere between Air & LN2. This is really going to vary based on what you are using and your temps
It seems AMD will update AOD and Fusion utility to provide some basic auto OCing(my guess),probably in effort to match core i7s turbo -both, in my opinion, are just gimmicks ,but well...Here is the quote:,Quote:
While I can't give exact numbers in terms of GHz, I can give you some of the voltages and temps seen while running the Crysis demo. Keep in mind these temps are not anywhere near 100% CPU usage, but they aren't exactly idle either.
* Air: Cooler Master Hyper Z600 - Around 1.5-1.55V / 33C
* Water/Tec: CoolIT Freezone Elite - Around 1.6V / 38C
* Phase Change: VapoChill - 1.7V / Below 0C (software / MB wouldn't report negative numbers)
* LN2: 1.75V (at least during the Crysis demo... *grin*)
All in all a great article!Quote:
The extra headroom that these new 45nm processors have give AMD the opportunity to really explore and expand their software overclocking tools. Around the launch of the Phenom II, look for updates to the AMD Overdrive utility and AMD's Fusion for Gaming application. These tools (along with the ATI Overdrive utility) really cater to PC Enthusiasts and Gamers of all skill sets. AMD has worked hard to make the interface as simple and automated as possible (for people that just want to game), while still featuring advanced menus for fine tuning (for people that really love to tweak every last bit).
Now on to some technical stuff,since someoen asked about IPC Deneb will bring.Well,it seems AMD gave the figures to german planet3dnowwebsite team:
You can see what AMD lists in IPC improvement list.Seems DDR3 will bring approx. ~5% more perf. when compared to AM2+ Denebs.So overall,going to AM3 Deneb from AM2+Agena one gets ~18% advantage per clock.AM2+ Denebs should be ~13% faster than Agena if these numbers are true(but this is kinda overall gain;somewhere will be higher(pov ray ie. ~21%),somewhere lower (Nero recode~5%) ).Shanghai seems to confirm these numbers so it may very well be true for desktop too.Quote:
* Approximately 3% come through improvements to the IPC standards.These come mainly through improvements in the Branch Prediction, the TLB and the pipeline.
* Approximately 10% of the larger L3 cache
* And again last about 5% through the transition from DDR2 to DDR3 memory.
Additional features will be smart Cool, application-specific profiles, an adjustable auto clock function and improved hardware monitoring with adjustable fan control.Details, but unfortunately there were none.
lol nice comic!Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
However if they use a proper imaging program like IrfanView or Photoshop, JPG saving at 80+% quality is extremely close to PNG, 90%+ almost artifact free.
God damn MS Paint :shakes:
nice find imformal! most ive heard so far
Those are pretty hard volts for 45nm though - 24/7 operation?
Def. vcore for Shanghai is 1.35V :p:,so 1.6V is 18% above stock.And by the looks of it,chips run very cool even on air while OCed so it shouldn't be an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras
Wow, thanks for all that info Informal. Deneb sounds to be shaping up very nicely. 33 degrees running Crysis on air. Damn.
That is impressive. Although i would have to invest in another form of heater though ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Frontl1ne
Hmm, so it's quite an advantage using DDR3 in Deneb's platfrom, right ? Perhaps that's exactly the direction i should take regarding my future upgrade plan. Hopefully, by the Q3 2009, DDR3 price would be much more affordable, there would be some price cut and better stepping from both AMD and Intel, and the exchange rate of my national currency against the greenback would be better than the current state (it has dropped around 35% in just about 2 months :()
look at that socket clearance :cool::cool::cool::cool:
i hate that type of socket though....so used to LGA
wish AMD would change FFS
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3210/...2f34e9.jpg?v=0
An overclocked Pentium D 805 or Phenom 9850 on a cheap budget as a web machine or dedicated server? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
BTW,
125W absolute worst case (probably not), 110W = my estimated normal case load of the 940.
On a very theoretical basis, assuming resistance is constant, power's proportional to voltage index squared.
1.6V
(1.18^2) * 125 = 174.05
(1.18^2) * 110 = 153.16400
1.55V
(1.15^2) * 125 = 165.3125
(1.15^2) * 110 = 145.47500
1.5V
(1.11^2) * 125 = 154.0125
(1.11^2) * 110 = 135.53100
Raising clocks will also raise power by a bit, so put that into consideration.
However as you've seen, 1.5-1.55 is VERY doable with a proper air heatsink. Even 1.6V can be done, but I suspect resistance issues start coming up from there- just my guess.
Frostytech has a NICE 150W test load, and you see the Z600 on it too. :)
http://www.frostytech.com/articlevie...id=2273&page=5
Seems that way. The high default voltage must be because the very thick gates AMD seems to be using for 45nm. Iirc they only shrunk the gates 7% according to that EEtimes article.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Actually, the 7% shrink is the gate length not gate thickness ... the gate thickness (oxide) was not mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
If any cpu in the next 2 years runs at 4ghz @1.55v @ 33c on air cooling near full load I will eat my hat live on a web cam.
Read the article again.Crysis is,AFAIK,not stressing all 4 cores,hence it's not a full load.But yeah,you can rest assured these thing will run relatively cool(compared to other CPUs),even after heavy OCing and overvolting.Another big plus since nobody wants a melting socket/board or excess heat heating up other components.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
lol reading skills:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Oh, also, make sure you save that movie too! I want to show it later to my kids:D
If you've seen my estimations coupled with the 150W synthetic load on LGA775 above you'd have some idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
It depends on ambient temp. 15+18 = 33. More likely it would be 25+20 (more than 150W) = ~45.
Another fake? However this one doesn't look like it's been shopped.
http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/phen...shot/6228.html
Looks real enough to me (at least more real than the others).Quote:
Originally Posted by suddeath
Which got me thinking.. all the ppl doing fakes, you think they may be doing it to provoke ppl who has acutally got the real deal, to feel safer breaking NDA 'cause "loads of others already did it" (maybe even Intel employees?)
There many more comments than before, and this one nails it on the head...Quote:
Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck
:rofl: :ROTF:Quote:
For english people: he said that has Windows XP SP3 during the tests, but on the scpeenshot on GPU-Z window you can see Vista 64 label.
Thank you for the info informal. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I read that few days ago in an german forum but here it is mentioned again.
If it's not CB10 stable it's not prime95 stable. :)Quote:
For performance, we should because of a NDAS not much to say only this: against an Intel Core i7 965 beat us the available model excellent. We were on the ground to a Phenom II on a Gigabyte motherboard 790GX-hand and say goodbye to the statements of AMD employees to convince himself. A clock frequency of just under 4 GHz was on all test systems quickly and also achieved stable, all the benchmarks ran without problems through, whether 7-zip, wprime, or games like Crysis and Farcry2. Only the Cinebench R10 crashed on all available machines from reproducibly a given clock frequency, while all other tests still easily went through. What exactly is due, we can not yet say.
"against an Intel Core i7 965 beat us the available model excellent"
What?
-----
Babelfish version!
So it's competitive AGAINST the i7 at 4 vs 3.2. They had to be convinced by AMD employees that it was? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Babelfish
Translatation issues.. :doh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Will someone translate that into proper English? :comp10:
I should have left out the first part. Here is a better translation.
Quote:
Due to the NDA we can not say much about performance, but against an i965 our modell ran quite competitive. We where allowed to get our hands on an Phenom II running on an GBT 790GX board to prove this amd coworkers statement.
CB10 crashed on all machine it's not CB10 not stable.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
You think it's a software issue? They do not mention it failed non overclocked. So why did they not verify stability with something else more reliable?Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
On the other hand I have not seen i920 prime95 proven oc's and it does not matter much for benching fun. ;)
It could be a CPU eratta of some sort (that happens at a certain frequency), seems that some code sequence in CB10 could have activated it.. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
What is with the 4 GHz on air sceptism by everyone? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by suddeath
I doubt the 5% IPC increasement due to faster ram, the only programs that would probably benefit form more bandwidth would be archivers. The other IPC gaines seem quite reasonable.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
Why? :shrug: I don't mind the pins on the CPU, actually I rather have them on the CPU than in the socket, a bent pin on the CPU isn't a big deal like it can be in the socket.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
But if you like LGA - which I have dubbed "lump grid array" :D - just get a dual opteron board, socket F is LGA and you'd have twice the CPUs to play with ;)
I don't think Phenom2 will be faster then Phenom, or at least not much. Remember the AMD chart? Phenom2 was about 16% faster then the old Phenom while the Phenom2 was clocked 15% higher.
Relatively cool with 125 W TDP? :rolleyes: E.g. Pentium D 820 was 95 W and I recall it was "too hot!".Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
There are tests of Shanghai compared to Barcelona. They show improvement. Besides, what is the point in triplefolding L3 if it brings no improvements? What about the other claimed improvements, E.g. improcved branch predictor, prefetcher, TLB...?Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
There is improvement, somewehere near 8-12 % average, depending a lot on programs used for measurement. Besides, which chart are you talking about? URL would be great. ;)
I'm not sceptic about Deneb doing 4GHz on air, IMO it's a real deal (though i'm not sure if it can be 24/7 stable with 1,55-1,6 core), but with all this fakes around how can we be sure which CPU-Z screenshot is authentic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Show me :rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Hardly a wide range but it's something...Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3456&p=7
I could be a suicide shot on air.. Maybe with no applications loading the cores. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
The voltage are almost inline with the other 4GHz CPUZ screenshot (from Coolaler forum), though a bit lower. :up:
It could be this one http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont...58&pageid=3149 (its source is from Coolaler forum):rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Another (old) source http://www.itocp.com/thread-12164-1-3.html :p:
Those are server side applications. They create lots of threads depending on the number of clients connected to it, thus the processor have to work on those threads (in memory) a lot. Opteron's high memory bandwdith and high speed interconnect benefits here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
I don't think Intel was honest before Core 2 Duo. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
And Phen II might be hot on stock/crappy HSF combos, but once you give it some muscle, it would be cool. Same applies to the 805.
You can't compare server benchmarks with desktop/gaming benchmarks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
Deneb doesn't even looks better then Phenom1 on the benchmarks provided by AMD so the only thing I expect is a Phenom1 on higher speeds.
But thats mainly cache heavy and cache coherency numbers. (Abit like 65nm vs 45nm Xeons).Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
For the desktop is another ballgame. Even 5% faster than phenom clock for clock would be impressive. I think people forget the K8->K10 improvement. And 45nm K10 is only a very small refinement of it. Think yorkfield vs kentsfield. More cache, small tweaks. Here is your 5%.
My bad, didn't pay too much attention to that article. What effect does gate length have on transistor performance? I still think it's unlikely they reduced gate thickness much, considering they actually increased it for K10 on the 65nm process.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Yeah, so that 20% boost on a C0 Stepping Deneb on POV-RAY (HardSpell) is completely useless.Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
Funny when it's Cinebench, then people take it as "desktop". Ugh.
I never look at cinebench.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
"One of the first enhancements, and perhaps the biggest change, is the increase of the L3 cache from 2MB to 6MB. On average, it's expected that this will increase performance by anywhere from 5-10%." + the claimed branch predictor, TLB and prefetcher improvements. Besides, as I said, it is hugely dependent on the programs used, there is no way of saying "average" really. For some people the average improvement might be 4-7, and for another 10-13% due to very different kinds of programs used. And after I think about it more troughly, I agree, it is a bit optimistic, yet possible. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
This might be fake though, but it is all I found. As it suggests, the IPC improvement varies a lot between apps.
Not fake. Acurate is another matter tho.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Plus its yet another thing they steal from a chinese site and post as their own. That site should be banned here.
QFT! Some folks will always pick what fits their opinion or view though. Hell, some will even change what they pick/think is important. Look at the whole SuperPi flap!? There will always be apps that will run better on a certain architecture/s. Servers and Desktops comparatives should be looked at only as a reference, nothing more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Hmm xtreview you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Nothing wrong here.Quote:
Associate published a review of the 45- nm processor phenom X4 on deneb core . For the tests Associate used the motherboard MSI K9A2 platinum, good for transfer from 65- nm to the 45- nm core and also 2 GB DDR2-800 memory form corsair productions and the graphic accelerator radeon HD 4850.
They dont seem to have anything together with the random chinese sites they take it from. And all the translations is pure google translations with all the errors. They always claim to be near, if not having it themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=3858 (With more numbers)
Some from hardspell. Others from pconline.cn etc.
But hey..its not like the circle doesnt go around:
http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=4511
http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=4509
:rofl:
Just so much junk "journalism" around to get ads revenue.
http://reviewage.co.uk/index.php/Lat...ld-Beater.html
:p:Quote:
There's said to be two chips in the pipeline, the FX-80 at 4Ghz and the FX-82 at 4.4GHz.
The FX-80 at stock out performs a 5.0GHz Kentsfield.
Why not? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Those uses one thread per core (like most desktop applications), doesn't rely on graphics hardware just pure processor power. Scales very nicely from 1 core to 4 cores on all processors, meaning cache coherency has little affect on it... And its based on real life applications (POV Ray and Cinema4D). It does show the processor's pure processing speed in 3D rendering which is FPU/SSE intensive. :up:
I don't think they meant 4 vs 3.2.Translation is awful.And those 3.2Ghz for core i7 are really 3.33 or often 3.46 :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
@Calmatory
You'll just have to wait and see how "hot" PhenomII is ,be stock or OC.I tell you it will be a lot cooler chip than core i7(which often reaches high eighties under air cooling in full load).
They do not take clockspeeds into account for that comparison. They just state that it does outstandingly (hervorragend) well compared to the i7 965. In addition to that they say that they had the chance to approve what the engineers claimed.
Thanks for the translation malice85 :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by malice85
Can you translate the rest? Thanks.. :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by malice85
The rest of that particular part?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
(Please excuse grammar / spelling etc. flaws)Quote:
A stable clockspeed of just under 4GHz was easily achieved on all testsystems using stock cooling. All benchmarks (7-Zip, wprime, Crysis or Farcry 2) ran without problems. Only Cinebench R10 crashed reproducibly on all machines from a certain clockspeed (meaning somekind of wall) while all the other test still ran without any problem. At this point we can't tell the exact cause.
If there's anything else you'd want me to translate just let me know ;)
Wow, that is fast.
Are you kidding me; your English is amazing for a non-native speaker? Anyway, not too good if they can reproduce crashing past a certain frequency; instability or worse bug? NDA is beginning to make sense to me now.Quote:
Originally Posted by malice85
It's my screen :Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
http://www.ixtremtek.com/ixtek/Overc...0/PICT0470.JPG
I Hate the FAKE and and even more when using my screen !! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Thanks, I just can't tell if it's wrong or right what i am writing, anyways it doesn't really matter :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
The question is what is that certain frequency and what does Cinebench that the others don't?
Re-quote...Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
Either that or they had some parts of the processor running above threshold, perhaps the NB, TLB, cache or FPU that CB10 triggered. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
Perhaps 3GHz was the top frequency before this starts. Other than that mostly speculations... Have to wait till the final chip comes out, hopefully it will be sorted out by then.. :up:
@boblemagnifique, I've spotted it early few pages back. :D
Yes it's true (i don't see) , thank you for the help :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
I will go contact AMD to be closed this blog is unacceptable to allow this information on the web !!
I am very unhappy, I hate it :cussing::dammit::cord::upset::soap:
AMD has nothing to do with that blog...Quote:
Originally Posted by boblemagnifique
Maybe you want to try contacting the folks at Hardspell? Alas maybe its a bit late, they embarassed themselves already http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=4500 :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by boblemagnifique
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
thats exactly why he contacting amd, to tell them that they(blog) spread fud about there(amds) unreleased product. :welcome:
Not everything is an attack against amd. :up:
Thanks for the effort. :up: :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by malice85
Quote:
Originally Posted by malice85
Some corrections.. Top frequency before this (crash) starts could be around 3.2GHz, just looking at the OCP forum results which the benchmarks (including Cinebench) were run at around 3.2GHz.. even though its possible to run at higher clock speeds (they could get 4GHz overclock out of their sample, so the headroom was there). Still speculations.. :idea:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
Turns out you were on the money. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...11#post3451811Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Quote:
We are not allowed to give specifics on speeds at this time, but as a generalization one can expect the following stable performance without too much tweaking effort:
* Air: Around 4GHz is a safe area to target with decent aftermarket cooling & mild voltage increase. When I say "around" that means above and below, so don't gripe at me if your CPU won't hit 4GHz, there is no guarantee with overclocking. Also there aren't exactly huge amounts of CPUs out in the wild yet, so observations are somewhat limited.
* LN2: If you were thinking 5GHz, guess again (and guess higher)... It was like the Energizer Bunny commercials... they just keep going, and going, and going. To say in excess of 5GHz is an understatement, but that's about as detailed as I'm allowed. There was another large leap too between what was "stable" and what you could get a CPU-Z screenshot of, so that shows even more promise in the long term as yields will undoubtedly improve.
* Water & Phase Change: Obviously somewhere between Air & LN2. This is really going to vary based on what you are using and your temps
Quote:
While I can't give exact numbers in terms of GHz, I can give you some of the voltages and temps seen while running the Crysis demo. Keep in mind these temps are not anywhere near 100% CPU usage, but they aren't exactly idle either.
* Air: Cooler Master Hyper Z600 - Around 1.5-1.55V / 33C
* Water/Tec: CoolIT Freezone Elite - Around 1.6V / 38C
* Phase Change: VapoChill - 1.7V / Below 0C (software / MB wouldn't report negative numbers)
* LN2: 1.75V (at least during the Crysis demo... *grin*)
Is that a guestimation, and what is ambient temp.?Quote:
* Air: Cooler Master Hyper Z600 - Around 1.5-1.55V / 33C
Well said informal!! :rofl::ROTF::clap::up:
linus ncix posted this preview. check it out
http://www.linustechtips.com/overclo...clocking-video
Little odd that CPU-Z reports it as being an Agena chip, but not so strange given the fact that he was using CPU-Z version 1.41. So seems to be legit to me and looking good as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by tictac
That's a range of Vcore needed for that clock.The temp. is not ambient,it's core temp on air at those volts and clocks while running Crysis.Ambient temp should be around 23C,they were at AMD's HQ which is air conditioned i presume.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
hahah you were rightQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
it was a whopping 12MHz over 3.6GHz :rolleyes:
http://www.linustechtips.com/overclo...clocking-video
Dinos that's a quick and dirty test by Linus,it's not the maximum he could get...For 30mins of OCing,it's great result on air.
Why you guys try to put a negative spin on this Deneb OCing potential?Are you scared of something or what?
Read my previous post what an article said about clock expectations.
Yeah, 3.6Ghz on AIR. Probably at 33C - 40C. Looks like a real dog huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Only very good news. Bad, good or medicore news is not allowed :rofl:
Even 3.6Ghz is nice enough tho for a quick OC...
And informal...why the paranoia? Now attacking people if they dont give what _you_ want?
This is an actual user for once...in a free uncontrolled environment.
Lol I'm "attacking people"?? Are you for real man?Better check your mirror for paranoia source.
The chip= teh sucks :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Yeah wow that's some attack!1!1 Give me a break. :rolleyes:
And why are you back here?To try and stir some more ** i suppose?:rolleyes:
Back on topic.Here's what Linus said about his video and OCing session :
Quote:
No benches unfortunately, but that shouldn't be too much of a mystery. It's a Phenom without the TLB bug. It has some more cache, and some tweaks. I'd say probably within 2-10% of original Phenom clock for clock.
As for more headroom, I don't know how good the compatibility of this board is with the mystery chip. It recognizes it correctly, but it takes a long time to POST. I think with a better board/better cooling there has got to be more headroom in here. Like I said before though, this was a VERY quick & dirty overclock and I don't even have the chip/board anymore.
I know you guys are foaming at the mouth for this stuff, but I'm lucky I was able to post what I did.
It may still come back and bite me in the butt!
Nah, others seems to that fine when they post something you dont like. Only the 4-6Ghz is ok? Rest is negative spins and people being scared.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Be careful not to fall down from the pedestal.
Read the above post for Linus' answer about the details of his OCing session.It's clearly a short session(he said 30 minutes) on a board that has a hard time posting with the chip.
He is just trying to put you in your place at the back of the Intel speed train.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Yeah he does try his best. There was the Nvidia speed train not so long ago :cool: .We now know that train was "slightly" derailed at the last stop :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
i am not trying to put a spin on anything
i am just trying to be factual and realistic here
i've already said that i am really happy to see AMD in such position and that i will buy and bench their hardware now
but we need to be vigilant for PR BS
if AMD claims their CPUs will all do 4GHz easy and some of the testing done so far from non-related sources says otherwise well it has to be said doesnt it
easy 3.6 and easy 4GHz are a lot different imo
it's not a 100MHz :banana::banana::banana::banana: up but 400MHz
how many reviews have you seen of i7 priming a 920 at 4.2GHz on air
i have an average chip i feel which requires more vcore then some of my fellow benchers but i can prime at 4.2GHz on air....not sure how stable yet but my guess is that it will handle crysis and similar fairly easily
imagine intel picking a gem that can EASILY do 4.4-4.5GHz on air cooling and everyone gets their CPUs and is getting 4GHz
there sure as hell would be a lot of pissed off ppl including me telling they about it :shrug:
we have to discuss facts so that fanaticism/fanboyism doesnt get in the way
Seriously, these guys are some kind of brotherhood. If someone post something "good", there is always one to backup him and say "Eh, you rule, and MAD more". If someone post something "bad" the brotherhood is right there to say "f*ck you Intel dog" in unison. Pfff get real guys, that behaviour is just retarded.
And no real info about perfomance or clocks yet :(
What's the fight here?? AMD's coming back in the fight with some nasty weapons under it's sleeve! It could be another good chapter in the computer era, with ATI coming back and then AMD, all competing with their opponents to offer the best bang for the buck! If you wanna buy only Intel, then go ahead. Wanna buy AMD: Go ahead! In the end, the only winner is us, since we are the one getting these excellent chips! We are the one that are getting these speed boosts year after year! Come on, stop arguing over who's a fanboy... we don't care, as long as AMD delivers quality products, everybody here wins!
:p: OOUCH! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I can run CB10 at 3465GHz and wprime ran only at 3465MHz(1G) -3485MHz(32m) on my 9950BE. On the showcase the systems passed wprime but failed CB10 at 4GHz. Now if they not mention at a certain clock i'd call it a software issue.
Current i7 systems seem not to run the steam benchmark of the sciencmark2 suite. Abit OT but has this been sorted out or even discussed?
noone said its a dog... As for temps well see that with the retail samples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
good post, the only believablething (in my eyes) right now is the 3,6ghz by linus. For all the other things thers to little evidence for my taste. Its nice that amd claims they can... but can we (as in consumers) get the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
As dinos dinos pointed out most of the Ci7 reviews showed a 920@ 3,8ghz-4ghz and now there are users that even get 4,2ghz primestable. Seems the samples Intel gave out pretty much where representative for what you will get with a retail chip.
For Amd it's hard to tell right now... on Amd own PR-show they said 4ghz+, we saw 3,6ghz form linus and saaya said 4ghz+ only for good chips and 3,6ghz for pretty much every chip (on air).
What to belive?
Honestly, i dont know, i'll wait till the 9th of december to make my judgment on this. :up:
IF the Dec. 16 availability date posted by a vendor HERE in Italy is in fact real, then maybe you will see some "legitimate" benchies in early Dec.
The fact that prices are posting in Australia and Italy is a good sign. But it always could be BS. We can only hope for benchmarks in Dec.
Im thinking if he showed that undisclosed cpu at 4ghz on air plus the fact the cpuz shot shows 8mb of cache that it would be to obvious? and violate the NDA? Maybe there are some lines they cant cross and showing the cpu at 4ghz on air is one of them.:shrug:
Oops, Linus seems to have the C2s. My bad.
What about ACC, though? Was it used?
Do we know for a fact that C2 was used exclusiverly at the infamous demo to journalists? I wonder if it was ES or retail version. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Pre-production, it should be ES and C2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
Is that your website? Do you have access to IP's that recently downloaded that image?Quote:
Originally Posted by boblemagnifique
Believing that anyone here for a second expects every single deneb to be an "easy"/definite 4ghz is neither factual nor realisticQuote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
even the most basic overclockers understand that the chips will have varying overclocking headroom and most would(should) understand the concept of marketing
not trying to start anything here, i just thought that this was a bit insulting considering the expertise of this forum
I think you are overestimating the rationality of many on this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by mars
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga