phenom II @ 6.5ghz (record?)

I read the stoiry in a couple places, but I havnt seen the vid.

they've edited the video in such a way i cant really tell whats going on, but it sounds like they didnt finish the test at 6.5, so they dropped back to 6.3 and ran it, and got the record. Still, of course rediculously impressive. And, obviously they used a DFI board... None of this Asus ROG crap.

Time for liquid hydrogen. -272C.
--also happens to be the definition of explosive.
 
About time AMD got some kind of record back from intel. Maybe the phenom 2 can't beat the core i7 clock for clock, but maybe if they work on scaling some more, they wont have to, they just clock it 6-800mhz faster. I remember the good ol days, when AMD was about the bleeding edge, and intel was about the mainstream consumer, I hope those days are back.
 
I find it really hard to see every customer of amd having a l2n pot, and the setup to clock it past what intel can do on reg air. Phenom 2 are mediocre overclockers on air, yes they do shine under subzero conditions, but cmon, does every amd customer have those kinds of resources?

''Screw intel, im a go buy a $600+ pot and overclock and say amd is better!''
 
$600+ pot? I can build one with $30 in copper parts and foam pipe wrap from Home Depot. Dry ice and acetone is pretty cheap too.

And in actuality both i7 and Phenom II are hitting roughly the same target range on air cooling, 3.8 - 4.2 Ghz. In performance clock for clock the i7 is faster though.
 
Casper312 said:
Phenom 2 are mediocre overclockers on air
Click to expand...

If you selectively ignore where people are hitting 3.8Ghz on air and stock voltages. Let alone what good air and water is giving. They still have an IPC gap but you're just being silly.
 
Stock voltages? Show me.

I should hang out more on other forums, cause over here and xs is where i have gotten that.
 
3.8 doesnt happen at stock volts, I haven't been playing with mine very long, but it takes a little bump in juice to get 3.6 stable, 3.8 wasnt happy at 1.5 and I wasn't going to go any higher on the stock cooler.
 
Is it impressive they got it to clock that high? Yes.
Is it impressive they beat a 3DMark record with an AMD chip? Yes
Is it impressive to the general consumer? Not yet.

What this shows is that AMDs chips do have some serious headroom. Even though their IPC is lower, if they can figure out a way to get them to clock significantly higher than i7 with air cooling, they still have a winner.

The Athlon 64 architecture worked its way up from 2GHz to 3GHz (stock clock) over a number of core revisions, we might very well be seeing Phenom II slowly climb from 3GHz to 4GHz through a similar process.
 
Go to the orb link, They did, but it got beat by a i7 965 @ 5200Ghz the next week.

I recall saying it was nothing impressive and someone was gonna beat it, and guess what? :cool:
 
Actually the i7 record was January 4th.
The AMD record was January 12th.

So they didn't beat the existing #1 score (8 days later).
 
Ahh, i see, so what happened, did they take off the top spot or did it just not show up? :eek:
 
UtopiA said:
Actually the i7 record was January 4th.
The AMD record was January 12th.

So they didn't beat the existing #1 score (8 days later).
Click to expand...

Even though AMD beat intel's i7 a few days later, the i7's record was not valid due to beta video drivers that weren't confirmed by futuremark.

amd is still on top

argue all you want for intel. amd is still on top with this one. but, i still dont see why they don't do FM'06. intel holds the top spots in that.
 
lol this is pretty crazy. Probably the most extreme organized overclocking session i've ever seen. Never heard of liquid helium lol
 
get a bunch of helium filled party balloons and put them in your freezer and they will fill with "water" which is actually liquid helium.


nothing i say is true, at all
 
Conker said:
lol this is pretty crazy. Probably the most extreme organized overclocking session i've ever seen. Never heard of liquid helium lol
Click to expand...

The temp of liquid helium is only a few Ks, very close to absolute zero. Most people use liquid nitrogen instead of liquid helium for cooling.
 
The extreme cold makes it tough to handle, be kinda hard to even see it for being used as coolant
 
I dunno much about 3dmark or how well the 4870x2s overclock, but couldn't they have increased their score a lot by cooling the GPUs in the same way and going for some insane overclock on them as well? They didn't even really mention the gpus in the video...
 
Abit667 said:
I dunno much about 3dmark or how well the 4870x2s overclock, but couldn't they have increased their score a lot by cooling the GPUs in the same way and going for some insane overclock on them as well? They didn't even really mention the gpus in the video...
Click to expand...

they werent trying to get the highest 3dmark score, they were seeing how high they could take phenom II
 
MrWizard6600 said:
I read the story in a couple places, but I haven't seen the vid.

they've edited the video in such a way i cant really tell whats going on, but it sounds like they didn't finish the test at 6.5, so they dropped back to 6.3 and ran it, and got the record. Still, of course ridiculously impressive. And, obviously they used a DFI board... None of this Asus ROG crap.

Time for liquid hydrogen. -272C.
--also happens to be the definition of explosive.
Click to expand...


Minor nitpick. :)

The video shows them using liquid He, which is as cold as it gets.
Hydrogen boils at −252.87°C (−423.17°F). Liquid Helium is a little colder at −268.93°C (−452.07°F)

I think they'll need some help from AMD if they want to hit 7GHz.
 
Very impressive. Gotta love the hype!

BTW, did anybody see the latest top score posted Feb 2? It's 47k and the processor listed is an i7 975 (ya, 975). WTF??
 
Yup, It was obtained by fugger/mike over at xs, with a es 975 i7 chip. With Stock 4870x2 in cf. :cool:
 
I was actually more interested in the fact that Futuremark's page says that the Core i7 975 was at 3.33GhZ (aka not overclocked). Then again, it says the Phenom II used in this demonstration was only at 4.4GhZ or something, so... yeah... also, I'm pretty sure all those top scores are 4870x2s at stock speeds. AMD wasn't showcasing the Radeon, after all.

BUT I find it a little odd that the Phenom II 940 performs closely to the Core i7 920 in gaming yet AMD didn't think to say "hey, let's demo Crysis at 6.5GhZ and show Intel whats up." Sure, having a really big number to show off corporate e-peen is pretty sweet, but what matters more to a gamer - 3DMark05 score or Crysis FPS? If 3DMark05 didn't crash at those speeds, they definitely could have ran the Crysis CPU benchmark without it crashing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top