Results 1 to 25 of 258

Thread: Intel brings forward Nehalem Launch

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    290
    How hard will it be to get the base clock to 200MHz? I'm wondering how easy/hard it will be to get the 2.66GHz Nehalem to 4.0GHz on air cooling. The actual Nehalem core should be capable of similar (or even better perhaps, because of the deeper pipeline) clocks to Core 2, so the question is whether or not the non-XE versions will be held back as much as a CPU like the Q9300 or Q9450 is held back now.
    Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.8GHz - Asus P6T Deluxe X58 - 6GB (2GBx3) G. SKILL DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-20 - 2 x EVGA GTX 280 1GB SLI - Corsair TX750 PSU - Windows Vista HP 64-bit

  2. #2
    Coat It with GOOOO
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,608
    Quote Originally Posted by Extelleron View Post
    How hard will it be to get the base clock to 200MHz? I'm wondering how easy/hard it will be to get the 2.66GHz Nehalem to 4.0GHz on air cooling. The actual Nehalem core should be capable of similar (or even better perhaps, because of the deeper pipeline) clocks to Core 2, so the question is whether or not the non-XE versions will be held back as much as a CPU like the Q9300 or Q9450 is held back now.
    The reference clock isn't really designed to scale that way, so it'll be interesting if you are trying to push it up that high I think. But we could be surprised.
    Main-- i7-980x @ 4.5GHZ | Asus P6X58D-E | HD5850 @ 950core 1250mem | 2x160GB intel x25-m G2's |
    Wife-- i7-860 @ 3.5GHz | Gigabyte P55M-UD4 | HD5770 | 80GB Intel x25-m |
    HTPC1-- Q9450 | Asus P5E-VM | HD3450 | 1TB storage
    HTPC2-- QX9750 | Asus P5E-VM | 1TB storage |
    Car-- T7400 | Kontron mini-ITX board | 80GB Intel x25-m | Azunetech X-meridian for sound |


  3. #3
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by Blauhung View Post
    The reference clock isn't really designed to scale that way, so it'll be interesting if you are trying to push it up that high I think. But we could be surprised.
    So how are these cpu´s supposed to be overclocked? I mean if cpu freq is "pll clock*cpu multiplier" we must be able to adjust any of those two factors to increase frecuency right? or am I missing something here?

  4. #4
    Coat It with GOOOO
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,608
    Quote Originally Posted by npk View Post
    So how are these cpu´s supposed to be overclocked? I mean if cpu freq is "pll clock*cpu multiplier" we must be able to adjust any of those two factors to increase frecuency right? or am I missing something here?
    I was more speaking of getting the ref clock from 133 to 200 might be a bit of a feat. The ref clock will increase, but it remains to be seen if a 50% overclock on the reference clock is even obtainable. All i'm saying is without hearing more, don't get your hopes up on seeing the reference clock move that much.
    Main-- i7-980x @ 4.5GHZ | Asus P6X58D-E | HD5850 @ 950core 1250mem | 2x160GB intel x25-m G2's |
    Wife-- i7-860 @ 3.5GHz | Gigabyte P55M-UD4 | HD5770 | 80GB Intel x25-m |
    HTPC1-- Q9450 | Asus P5E-VM | HD3450 | 1TB storage
    HTPC2-- QX9750 | Asus P5E-VM | 1TB storage |
    Car-- T7400 | Kontron mini-ITX board | 80GB Intel x25-m | Azunetech X-meridian for sound |


  5. #5
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    912
    I doubt the reference clock is designed to be overclocked on AMDs either but they seem to go high enough on select chips.

    If they don't overclock well via the reference clock or the board manufacturers don't figure out a way to sneak in higher multipliers than intended through 'Turbo' then I must say I'm less tempted. A $999 CPU is probably the last thing I'll ever buy.

  6. #6
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,204
    Quote Originally Posted by bowman View Post
    I doubt the reference clock is designed to be overclocked on AMDs either but they seem to go high enough on select chips.

    If they don't overclock well via the reference clock or the board manufacturers don't figure out a way to sneak in higher multipliers than intended through 'Turbo' then I must say I'm less tempted. A $999 CPU is probably the last thing I'll ever buy.
    Why buy a $999 processor when the 2.66GHz is already given a $284 tp-1000. $299 to $325? There hasn't been many times that folks bought a top to then overclock.

    It will kick a$$ without high overclocks anyway. That's without comparing it to an already slower AMD but Intel processors as well.

  7. #7
    Coat It with GOOOO
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,608
    Quote Originally Posted by bowman View Post
    I doubt the reference clock is designed to be overclocked on AMDs either but they seem to go high enough on select chips.

    If they don't overclock well via the reference clock or the board manufacturers don't figure out a way to sneak in higher multipliers than intended through 'Turbo' then I must say I'm less tempted. A $999 CPU is probably the last thing I'll ever buy.
    I'm kinda out of it on how high the ref clock on AMD chips goes, but is a 50% increase there within the realm of possibility? It's a very similar system so if 300MHz clocks from a base of 200 on AMD are possible I would assume that it's may be possible to get 200Mhz from a base of 133 on Intel.

    I haven't been paying too much attention to AMD clocking, but I don't think i've seen 300. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    EDIT:
    hehe, and I found some
    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=167502 There's 310

    So right now it's all just a waiting game. We will have to wait and see how well the reference clock does scale.
    Last edited by Blauhung; 07-31-2008 at 06:16 PM.
    Main-- i7-980x @ 4.5GHZ | Asus P6X58D-E | HD5850 @ 950core 1250mem | 2x160GB intel x25-m G2's |
    Wife-- i7-860 @ 3.5GHz | Gigabyte P55M-UD4 | HD5770 | 80GB Intel x25-m |
    HTPC1-- Q9450 | Asus P5E-VM | HD3450 | 1TB storage
    HTPC2-- QX9750 | Asus P5E-VM | 1TB storage |
    Car-- T7400 | Kontron mini-ITX board | 80GB Intel x25-m | Azunetech X-meridian for sound |


  8. #8
    V3 Xeons coming soon!
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    36,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Blauhung View Post
    I'm kinda out of it on how high the ref clock on AMD chips goes, but is a 50% increase there within the realm of possibility? It's a very similar system so if 300MHz clocks from a base of 200 on AMD are possible I would assume that it's may be possible to get 200Mhz from a base of 133 on Intel.

    I haven't been paying too much attention to AMD clocking, but I don't think i've seen 300. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    EDIT:
    hehe, and I found some
    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=167502 There's 310

    So right now it's all just a waiting game. We will have to wait and see how well the reference clock does scale.
    I don't want to wait..
    Crunch with us, the XS WCG team
    The XS WCG team needs your support.
    A good project with good goals.
    Come join us,get that warm fuzzy feeling that you've done something good for mankind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frisch View Post
    If you have lost faith in humanity, then hold a newborn in your hands.

  9. #9
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Extelleron View Post
    How hard will it be to get the base clock to 200MHz? I'm wondering how easy/hard it will be to get the 2.66GHz Nehalem to 4.0GHz on air cooling. The actual Nehalem core should be capable of similar (or even better perhaps, because of the deeper pipeline) clocks to Core 2, so the question is whether or not the non-XE versions will be held back as much as a CPU like the Q9300 or Q9450 is held back now.
    Held back?

  10. #10
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by Donnie27 View Post
    Held back?
    The Yorkfield core is capable of 4GHz, but the Q9300 / Q9450 are held back because of the multiplier. 4GHz on a Q9450 would require a 500MHz FSB, absolutely impossible to make stable on air cooling with a quad-core.
    Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.8GHz - Asus P6T Deluxe X58 - 6GB (2GBx3) G. SKILL DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-20 - 2 x EVGA GTX 280 1GB SLI - Corsair TX750 PSU - Windows Vista HP 64-bit

  11. #11
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    433
    Quote Originally Posted by Extelleron View Post
    How hard will it be to get the base clock to 200MHz? I'm wondering how easy/hard it will be to get the 2.66GHz Nehalem to 4.0GHz on air cooling. The actual Nehalem core should be capable of similar (or even better perhaps, because of the deeper pipeline) clocks to Core 2, so the question is whether or not the non-XE versions will be held back as much as a CPU like the Q9300 or Q9450 is held back now.
    It does have a low core volt. I think it is 1.075v. I think we will soon start seeing some OC Nehalem reviews.

    http://www.nehalemnews.com/
    Intel Core i7 LGA1366 - 3.60GHz (20x 180 BCLK) / 4 Cores / 8 Threads / 1.26v / UCLK 3067MHz / QPI 6.47 GTs
    Crucial, Micron D9JNM ICs, 12GB DDR3 - 1440MHz, 8-8-8-20 1T, 1.6v, Tri-Channel
    Palit NVIDA GeForce GTX 460 1GB DDR5 16x 2.0 - GPU 750MHz / Shader 1500Hz / DDR5 3625MHz
    2x Intel X25-M G2, 80GB SSD, ICH10R RAID 0 / Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
    ....... System Runs 24/7....... system_01

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •