4 GHz will for you now at 100% stable :-). I was not too much lucky with 965 BE, today i has some playing with it and i cant got 4 GHz LINX ...At begining has the chip better electrical values- thinking
ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread
and info for saaya:
chips are diferent, best 940 retails are as a normal average C2 955 chips example (3.8 GHz). I had very good 955 BE, 3.9 GHz aircooling stable and 965 C2 was a bit better-some exceptionally retails hiting at 4 GHz air stable, C3 revision is one step higher, average chips hiting between 3.95 GHz-4 GHz air stable and later batches was better. The best C3 can hit 4.1 GHz stable.
Diferent story is l-k E0 Thuban. Ussualy hiting between 4-4.2 GHz stable, sometimes are chips as in my signature :-) (4300 MHz stable with aircooling) and the best chip what i seen has MAD222, 4.34 GHz stable (if we downclock uncore clock, we can go a bit higher...). Of course, are 4 GHz 940 and 4 GHz. Because validation is easy, some webs test as stable setings only benchmark setings. Example, with 965 BE chip i can runing Cinebench at 4100 MHz stable, but full stable clock is 4 GHz.
ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1409365
Prime to 4ghz for 1.32V on air.
But That 970BE is a deneb C3 like the 965BE and cant be unlock to 6 cores
***** Visit us on PCWorld.fr *****
It's hard to tell where the quads really were topping out since to most posters "stable" is what they can run without crashing much. These numbers are usually inflated from where the chips can really operate reliably. In any case, we've definitely seen some major improvement on AMD's 45nm, and it's not like it really started out at any point less than "quite good". I remember the thrill of AMD's maximum frequencies being in the 3-3.3GHz range with 65nm 5000+ duals or 2.6-2.8GHz with 9850 quads and all of a sudden we could were allowed pretty much no less than 3.5GHz on the first 45nm quad core models. I, as with many others, was all teeth from grinning so widely. Now, Thuban models will mostly do 4GHz with reliability, though some do worse than others. I've had particularly rotten luck with a 1055 and 1090 that both struggle to be fully stable at anything beyond 4GHz even at 1.55V, but it's still a pretty big improvement from that 3.6GHz @ 1.55V 940BE I had.
I know Sayaa has taken back his claim, but I did want to add another account to the record.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Bookmarks