New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

4.588GHz ... overclocked

post #1 of 33
2/23/03 at 7:57am
Thread Starter 

... 4588.49Mhz

http://son.t-next.com/wcpuid/wcpuid.html

They managed to clock a 3.06Ghz chip to 4588Mhz!!! hehe...
Yeah well they got an 800Mhz bus also... When will Sager catch up with these guys??
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 33
2/23/03 at 8:44am
damn!!! how the hell did they do it?
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 33
2/23/03 at 8:59am
lol, the site doesn't say how they did it, so all i can say is ... liquid nitrogen? Tom's Hardware did it with some sort of compressor...


The 800 mhz fsb is hardly out for desktops...I dont know when to expect it for LAPTOPS.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 33
2/23/03 at 10:21am
that's huge dude, i got duron 800MHz and when i overclock it over 880MHz my pc doesn't start if i don't reset cmos, and that guy overclocked 1500MHz!!! wow
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 33
2/23/03 at 3:09pm
Escuse my pessismism, but Ghz arent everything, I mean look at the AMD chipsets, the 3000+ Barton keeps up with a 3.06 GHZ intel, and it only runs at ~ 2200Ghz...i mean sure, if you have lots of Ghz it'll be fast, but it also matters HOW it actually handles things, like the HT on the 3.06, thats good stuff, i'd rather see all HT, then somethin w/o HT. Take a step back, and take things into perspective. i am an avid amd fan, and the only reason i'd buy intel is for a laptop because thats really all that is availible. I shudder to think of the price difference if sagers had amd instead of wintel. Man it'd be soo much better, well i dunno, dont fret over the OC, sure its nice, but they dont say how they did it. SO yea as far as im concerned, they took a cup o' noodles cup and poured liquid nitrogen in it and had fun for about 24 hours then had to go out and buy a new mobo/processor.

I think OC's these days are nothing, an OC is not an OC unless the system is stable, and useable every day. just my pennies
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 33
2/23/03 at 4:34pm
I agree on that point... But the part about AMD... well, I wouldn't want to see the AMD in here because of the fact that Athlons get hotter and suck more power than the Intels. Other than that it would be kinda cool to see, but now that I've experienced HT, lol, there's no going back :-)
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 33
2/23/03 at 4:49pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Mellman99
Escuse my pessismism, but Ghz arent everything, I mean look at the AMD chipsets, the 3000+ Barton keeps up with a 3.06 GHZ intel, and it only runs at ~ 2200Ghz...i mean sure, if you have lots of Ghz it'll be fast, but it also matters HOW it actually handles things, like the HT on the 3.06, thats good stuff, i'd rather see all HT, then somethin w/o HT. Take a step back, and take things into perspective. i am an avid amd fan, and the only reason i'd buy intel is for a laptop because thats really all that is availible. I shudder to think of the price difference if sagers had amd instead of wintel. Man it'd be soo much better, well i dunno, dont fret over the OC, sure its nice, but they dont say how they did it. SO yea as far as im concerned, they took a cup o' noodles cup and poured liquid nitrogen in it and had fun for about 24 hours then had to go out and buy a new mobo/processor.

I think OC's these days are nothing, an OC is not an OC unless the system is stable, and useable every day. just my pennies
The new 3000+ can't keep up with the P4 2.8, or the previous 2800+, LET ALONE, the 3.06 GHz.

So GHz aren't all, but they sure as heck ARE very important. AMD's better "design" is so good, that they can't keep up making it faster in the same way intel can with their trusty P4 core. Sure, the P4 has a deeper, slower pipeline, but it allows intel to ramp up the GHz (and the respective speed) like there is no tomorrow.

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 33
2/23/03 at 4:49pm
Mellman99....
When you have that many GHz, it IS everything. The 3.6 P4 that Tom's Hardware overclocked absolutely destroyed everything it was put up against in straight line performance. The 3.06 with HT did beat it on a multitask though. The Barton 3000+ is a huge disappointment (not because it was supposed to be great, but because of it's name: 3000+). Acts more like a 2800-.

Also, check out my post about 3.06 and HT in a 5660 to learn when the 800MHz FSB will be in the 5660 according to a Clevo reseller.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 33
2/23/03 at 5:40pm
Well im still sticking strongly to AMD, when the hammer comes out, its going to rock. I just hate paying the extra hundred bucks for a product that your just paying for the name. Its like going out and buying nike shoes, but even though you can get the same product somewhere else, just because its got that little nike on it, you pay 50$ more.

I just dont like how intel advertises, AMD is a damned good processor for your money. The uneducated conusmer doesnt understand that Ghz isnt everything, because when it comes down to it, it is not. Im not saying the 3000+ is the best thing since sliced bread, i think it was pointless to even put money into developing it. I just think intel is given too much credit, and is overlooked by the GP
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 33
2/23/03 at 7:28pm
I like AMD because they keep Intel's prices low =P If you look around, you'll see that the prices of the Intel processors aren't as high as they used to be.

I'm afraid of AMD going out of business, their stock is, what, 3 bucks? If they go out, Intel prices go up.

Last I heard, Intel holds 75% of the market.

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...1119017379.htm may be an interesting link for you. Yes, I realize it's "Geek".com. And that its relatively old.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 33
2/23/03 at 7:56pm
The 3000+ barton may not beat the 3.06 Ghz, nor the 2800+ but they are pretty darn close, i mean, a few points here and there in benchmarks does not mean a thing. When it all comes down to it, amd is still cheaper. Anandtech has a really good review of the barton, sometimes the amd wins, sometimes the wintel wins....its all there in the buff, i still stand by that when the clawhammer comes out....its over
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 33
2/23/03 at 8:10pm
Of course we've never seen the Clawhammer, but I would tend to agree with you that the Pentium 4 in its current incarnation won't be able to compete with the Clawhammer... But you have to remember that the Prescott is coming out soon. It has the 90nm process coupled with 1MB Cache, 800MHz FSB and next generation Hyper-Threading. I don't use AMD, but I'm glad they're there! Competition is what fuels advancement and pricing!
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 33
2/23/03 at 9:40pm
Quote:
Originally posted by atbear
Mellman99....
When you have that many GHz, it IS everything. The 3.6 P4 that Tom's Hardware overclocked absolutely destroyed everything it was put up against in straight line performance. The 3.06 with HT did beat it on a multitask though. The Barton 3000+ is a huge disappointment (not because it was supposed to be great, but because of it's name: 3000+). Acts more like a 2800-.

Also, check out my post about 3.06 and HT in a 5660 to learn when the 800MHz FSB will be in the 5660 according to a Clevo reseller.
I think you mean 3.06 instead of 3.6 in first sentences since 3.6 is not out let and probaly wont be out for a month or so(ok, probaly a little bit longer ) so they couldnt be messing with 1 unless they have major inside connections with intel
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 33
2/23/03 at 9:46pm
Quote:
Originally posted by denkc
lol, the site doesn't say how they did it, so all i can say is ... liquid nitrogen? Tom's Hardware did it with some sort of compressor...


The 800 mhz fsb is hardly out for desktops...I dont know when to expect it for LAPTOPS.
It also doesnt mention temperature or anything like that.. could be that it was at max temperature just short of temp shutdown when he captured that wcpuid...
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 33
2/23/03 at 9:48pm

Re: 4.588GHz ... overclocked

Quote:
Originally posted by opusagogo
[
They managed to clock a 3.06Ghz chip to 4588Mhz!!! hehe...
Yeah well they got an 800Mhz bus also... When will Sager catch up with these guys??
Probaly wont since that was most likely a dektop with extreme cooling... Also the higher you overclock the more stress you put on the computer and possibly shorten its life...
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 33
2/23/03 at 9:49pm
Quote:
I think you mean 3.06 instead of 3.6 in first sentences since 3.6 is not out let and probaly wont be out for a month or so(ok, probaly a little bit longer ) so they couldnt be messing with 1 unless they have major inside connections with intel
No, I did mean 3.6. Go read the Tom's Hardware Guide writeup. They used a 3.6 P4, a 3.06 with HT, and a 3.06 without HT... against the AMDs.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 33
2/23/03 at 11:47pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Mellman99
The 3000+ barton may not beat the 3.06 Ghz, nor the 2800+ but they are pretty darn close, i mean, a few points here and there in benchmarks does not mean a thing. When it all comes down to it, amd is still cheaper. Anandtech has a really good review of the barton, sometimes the amd wins, sometimes the wintel wins....its all there in the buff, i still stand by that when the clawhammer comes out....its over
The hammers have been delayed so much, they are no longer relevant. Prescott will cream anything AMD can throw at it for a LONG time. And don't forget, ladies and gentlemen, Nehalem is already working at some intel R&D lab somewhere. Let's see how AMD takes that one. If you really need your 64-bit machine, Itanium and Itanium 2 are already there. Seems like intel has got all its bases covered, but it'll be nice to see if AMD can out-intel intel itself out of this one.

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 33
2/23/03 at 11:50pm
You think Prescott will beat the Clawhammer in its first incarnation, Yale?
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 33
2/23/03 at 11:58pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Yale2006
The hammers have been delayed so much, they are no longer relevant. Prescott will cream anything AMD can throw at it for a LONG time. And don't forget, ladies and gentlemen, Nehalem is already working at some intel R&D lab somewhere. Let's see how AMD takes that one. If you really need your 64-bit machine, Itanium and Itanium 2 are already there. Seems like intel has got all its bases covered, but it'll be nice to see if AMD can out-intel intel itself out of this one.

Cheers.
Saw on 1 site where they went to a laptop show that had vendors showing new techs and they had a picture of a few upcoming centrino models and amd had an amd 64 bit laptop reference model..(Like most reference models the laptop didnt look like much (beige etc.. ) but at least they are working on such.. amd might beat intel in getting a 64 bit processor on laptops, they didnt have any specs on it though..
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 33
2/24/03 at 12:05am
Quote:
Originally posted by atbear
You think Prescott will beat the Clawhammer in its first incarnation, Yale?
I would say I think so, but it isn't that easy. It will probably have to do with who releases their CPU first. It's all about counter-attacks obviously. If intel pushes out a first Prescott before AMD and it beats the hammer, then AMD might counter that with simply a "faster" initial hammer release. As you know, it's not "one" CPU that gets designed, but several flavors with different speeds. Thus AMD will probably market their CPUs according to what they think is equivalent to intel's.

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebooks