Zen apparently overclocking to 5 ghz on air.

Database

Detroit Redbirds!!!
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
2,536
Apparent Easter Egg in that French magazine review with a binary text of...

010110100110010101101110010011110100001101000000010000010110100101110010001111010011010101000111

Google it for information. Great news if true!
 
Apparent Easter Egg in that French magazine review with a binary text of...

010110100110010101101110010011110100001101000000010000010110100101110010001111010011010101000111

Google it for information. Great news if true!

Doing a little looking around seems to be legit, the binary appears in both the digital version of the French mag, and the printed version

eGYtpB4.jpg
 
lol would be great, but OMG guys, this is really really really not what I would expect at retail. Maybe on DI/phase change on a lucky cpu. I'll be happy if the retail chips can hit 4.4ghz+ and don't suck in IPC. If they do clock to 5ghz wow, AMD would be back. Too much Kool-Aid for me to swallow tho
 
lol would be great, but OMG guys, this is really really really not what I would expect at retail. Maybe on DI/phase change on a lucky cpu. I'll be happy if the retail chips can hit 4.4ghz+ and don't suck in IPC. If they do clock to 5ghz wow, AMD would be back. Too much Kool-Aid for me to swallow tho

Didn't someone say something about the processor boosting one core if the application was single threaded? Or was that only the new Intel chips? Ha ha I forget!

ka_ohno.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this
I might have to just put my intel system as HTPC duty in the living room and do a new build just because... lol
 
This is how silly-season goes full retard.

Those numbers are not to be taken seriously....look at the next batch of numbers:

"010010010110111001110100011001010110110000100000010001110101000001010101001000000011110100100000010000010100110101000100"

That turns into:
Intel GPU = AMD

You got played...*sigh*
 
This is how silly-season goes full retard.

Those numbers are not to be taken seriously....look at the next batch of numbers:

"010010010110111001110100011001010110110000100000010001110101000001010101001000000011110100100000010000010100110101000100"

That turns into:
Intel GPU = AMD

You got played...*sigh*

This was a binary string from their march issue, which turned out to be true since Intel licensed some AMD stuff for their iGPUs iirc. So how did we get played exactly? Might wanna check your facts before posting FUD next time, friend. If anything, this makes the 5ghz all the more credible.

In all fairness, I'm still skeptical about it myself, but saying we got played is outright false.

Lol: https://hardforum.com/threads/from-...in-futility-h.1900681/page-61#post-1042685022
 
This was a binary string from their march issue, which turned out to be true since Intel licensed some AMD stuff for their iGPUs iirc. So how did we get played exactly? Might wanna check your facts before posting FUD next time, friend. If anything, this makes the 5ghz all the more credible.

In all fairness, I'm still skeptical about it myself, but saying we got played is outright false.

Lol: https://hardforum.com/threads/from-...in-futility-h.1900681/page-61#post-1042685022

No offensive to Kyle, but its still a rumor. A rumor that has bounced around since March, the time CPC released their first message. Even if the first rumor is true, it does not mean necessarily that the 2nd is, just that they guessed it right, or their source told them, either way, that does not say anything about AMD's stuff.
 
No offensive to Kyle, but its still a rumor. A rumor that has bounced around since March, the time CPC released their first message. Even if the first rumor is true, it does not mean necessarily that the 2nd is, just that they guessed it right, or their source told them, either way, that does not say anything about AMD's stuff.

You're right it doesn't. All I'm saying is that the previous poster came to a laughably mistaken conclusion.
 
You're right it doesn't. All I'm saying is that the previous poster came to a laughably mistaken conclusion.

Its you being mistaken until proven otherwise. Until there is a SEC filling or a press release, then Intel haven't licensed any GPU tech from AMD. And certainly not implementing them as MCM designs.

 
Its you being mistaken until proven otherwise. Until there is a SEC filling or a press release, then Intel haven't licensed any GPU tech from AMD.

Cool. I'll take your word over Kyle's word and over a legit publications with multiple on point leaks in the past. And even if I end up being mistaken, the conclusion he drew was still "Oh look they're just messing around with binaries, look at the next batch of binaries (which is from march lol). You guys got obviously played." which is a dumb conclusion to come to from the data presented.
 
Cool. I'll take your word over Kyle's word and over a legit publications with multiple on point leaks in the past. And even if I end up being mistaken, the conclusion he drew was still "Oh look they're just messing around with binaries, look at the next batch of binaries (which is from march lol). You guys got obviously played." which is a dumb conclusion to come to from the data presented.

Both AMD and Intel are public traded companies and if a deal is made it needs to be public due to stockholders. Then you can try excuse it on whatever. But either the deal isn't made yet or its not happening.
 
Both AMD and Intel are public traded companies and if a deal is made it needs to be public due to stockholders. Then you can try excuse it on whatever.

I don't care about the deal. If it's made public when it's finalized good. My issue was that the above poster came to a bad conclusion given the data that was provided. We done here?
 
This was a binary string from their march issue, which turned out to be true since Intel licensed some AMD stuff for their iGPUs iirc. So how did we get played exactly? Might wanna check your facts before posting FUD next time, friend. If anything, this makes the 5ghz all the more credible.

In all fairness, I'm still skeptical about it myself, but saying we got played is outright false.

Lol: https://hardforum.com/threads/from-...in-futility-h.1900681/page-61#post-1042685022


Bookmarked for later reference.
 
Bookmarked for later reference.

Later reference of what? Whether the 5Ghz thing is true (Which as I stated I also doubt) is irrelevant to my point. You just came to the wrong conclusion from the data you had.
 

Read that too. Got to remember that there will be quads coming too. And quads OC to higher speeds than octa-cores. Case in point any Intel processor such as the 6700K vs the 5960x when overclocking. Also why people proclaim that the 6700K is a better gaming processor even though it has less threads and cores. :)

With that said, I didn't partake of the golden chalice of Kool Aid. ;) I pretend that I'm from Missouri when it comes to tech rumors; you have to show me before I believe it.
 
Both AMD and Intel are public traded companies and if a deal is made it needs to be public due to stockholders. Then you can try excuse it on whatever. But either the deal isn't made yet or its not happening.

That is not correct, no information has to be disclosed until a signed agreement comes into effect, up till then you can deny it or no comment it to death. Only if shares are trading hands does it have to be brought up before to shareholders. This is why insider trading is a huge deal.
 
That is not correct, no information has to be disclosed until a signed agreement comes into effect, up till then you can deny it or no comment it to death. Only if shares are trading hands does it have to be brought up before to shareholders. This is why insider trading is a huge deal.

And nobody is committing anything until a signed deal is made due to legal reasons. In Japan you could get away doing that for some time. But not in the rest of the world.

So in short, there is no deal (with a possible yet).
 
5Ghz is still 5Ghz. It'd probably use well over 300W if you try to get 5Ghz on all 8.

Lets hope for an average 4.5Ghz OC on all 8 cores.
 
5Ghz is still 5Ghz. It'd probably use well over 300W if you try to get 5Ghz on all 8.
Lets hope for an average 4.5Ghz OC on all 8 cores.

But would the power draw matter when you are talking about 5GHZ ? If it was easy then everyone would have them at 5ghz. Since it never works that way why be worried about the power draw to begin with ?

The 4.5GHZ overclock would sound good but that will increase power draw as well :) . Is it manageable to get over 4GHZ without needing really good cooling that part would surprise me if you could get there with air cooling (single core is not really that interesting).
 
Last edited:
As someone with watercooling, I hope the motherboard manufacturers get their collective heads out of their asses and give us motherboards with the ability to not get in the way of overclocking Zen. 300 watts of possible power draw? Not really a problem cooling wise. I dump my waste heat outside through the window anyway lol
 
As someone with watercooling, I hope the motherboard manufacturers get their collective heads out of their asses and give us motherboards with the ability to not get in the way of overclocking Zen. 300 watts of possible power draw? Not really a problem cooling wise. I dump my waste heat outside through the window anyway lol
Back in the day, even one of the "wimpier" X58 mobos (EX58-UD3R) still had a very solid VRM section.
 
The 920 at 4.0GHZ used tons of power. Tons. A metric shitton. That is why I needed 1000W at the PSU to power it and a 5970.

I ain't scared of this.
yea, I've run my 950 at 4.2-4.3 and am still rolling X58 with a 6 core xeon; new chips aren't scary to us :)
 
The 920 at 4.0GHZ used tons of power. Tons. A metric shitton. That is why I needed 1000W at the PSU to power it and a 5970.

I ain't scared of this.
Depends on whether you have the older C0 stepping + needed stupid Vcore to reach 4GHz.
All my D0s hit 4GHz with ~1.052V :

aratar_2small.png~original
 
It was C0 of course
Ah, that makes sense then. Only had a single C0 back in the day and it did get to 4GHz, but at stupid temps + Vcore :(

Also, just checked the date on the screenshot. 7+ years later and we're STILL dicking around 4+ GHz?! Hell the good 'ol E6600 managed to hit 3.6GHz+ even before then.

I know that the semicon companies have to cater to market demographics, but GOD DAYUM!, stop this power / mobile optimization sh*t and give us 6GHz 8c/16t on air already!
And none of the crappy TIM under the IHS sh*t too while you're at it.
 
Ah, that makes sense then. Only had a single C0 back in the day and it did get to 4GHz, but at stupid temps + Vcore :(

Also, just checked the date on the screenshot. 7+ years later and we're STILL dicking around 4+ GHz?! Hell the good 'ol E6600 managed to hit 3.6GHz+ even before then.

I know that the semicon companies have to cater to market demographics, but GOD DAYUM!, stop this power / mobile optimization sh*t and give us 6GHz 8c/16t on air already!
And none of the crappy TIM under the IHS sh*t too while you're at it.


IPC has been going up fairly consistently, so chill...otherwise you're just asking for a Pentium 4 on 10nm.
 
dreams back to times where a new generation of CPU's meant both higher clock and improved IPC...:happy: its such a faint memory.

The problem is physics; power/cooling requirements necessary to obtain 5GHz+ speeds make it near impossible to achieve on consumer CPUs. I simply doubt we'll get speeds much higher then we're getting using current processor design. We'd need to move to some other form of computing (Optical?) in order to ramp speeds again.
 
The problem is physics; power/cooling requirements necessary to obtain 5GHz+ speeds make it near impossible to achieve on consumer CPUs. I simply doubt we'll get speeds much higher then we're getting using current processor design. We'd need to move to some other form of computing (Optical?) in order to ramp speeds again.
? I'm not sure why you are trying to explain something to me.
 
Back
Top