Conroe breaks 5GHz mark.. (1 Viewer)

[Collin]

Intel's new Conroe processors (known to most as the Core 2 for desktops) has already blown many over with it's astounding preliminary benchmarks.

Now some insane dude has OCed one to hit the 5.0GHz mark.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=101190

Keep in mind that a 2.4GHz Conroe beats a 2.8GHz AMD FX-62 in every gaming benchmark, according to all available sources presently.

These chips should be availxable around June/July, and no doubt we should be able to acquire an Opteron/X2-equivalent Conroe chip for significantly less, which is absolutely great for gamers. Plus, these chips are generally excellent overclockers, which makes them the perfect cheaper alternatives to Opterons.

I can't believe Intel has finally come up with a product which has put it back onto the performance market with a big bang. With Vista (and hence DX10) to be released by early next year and AMD's FX-64 scheduled for release a few months later, many hardware enthusiasts will be looking to build a new rig and Conroe just seems to be the way to go.

 

[Templar]

Well, the delay in bringing forward K8L from AMD isn't doing it much good either, but seeing it will probably just be a refresh it would not prevent AMD losing to competition. In addition, Intel is planning a new architecture every two years, which would cause major headaches for AMD.

Really, it wasn't a matter of when Intel will come up with a competitive product, rather, when they are going to admit their mistakes with Netburst and move on.

 

[Optophobia]

Keep in mind that a 2.4GHz Conroe beats a 2.8GHz AMD FX-62 in every gaming benchmark, according to all available sources presently.

I would have thought that a 1 Khz <anything> would beat a 2.8 Ghz AMD

 

[Collin]

Intel has always had competitive products, such as their Extreme Edition equivalents to some of AMD's top brass, but for them to release something which not only 'competes' but pretty much stomps over the competition's flagship model, whilst also costing somewhat considerably less and also offering significantly better overclockability -- I didn't expect that from Intel. I didn't expect to jump the AMD bandwagon anytime soon (infact, both my previous rigs have boasted AMDs, disregarding laptops).. and was planning an AM2 upgrade (even though it hasn't exactly been spectacular in any sense of the word); but then suddenly out of nowhere Intel pulls out Core 2.

Speaking of Core 2 in general, I should mention I'm quite enthusiastic about Merom and the incoming Vista notebooks too.

 

[Serius]

5ghz has been reached heaps before, on air aswell.

Still not bad for such a high performer, i expect great things from it

 

[Collin]

That's precisely the point -- that if a 2.4GHz edition can outpunch an AMD FX-62 @ 2.8GHz, then we truly have a monster @ 5GHz. Infact, the thread even suggested SuperPI < 10 secs, which is WOWz0rs <3.

It's the implecations that's important, for we know most high-end SLi (or Crossfire) systems are CPU-bound. Combine an OCed Conroe with SLi-ed 7900GTXs, and we may truly have found the epitome of a legitimately balanced top-end system.

 

[Serius]

this was the fastest conroe i had seen beforehand:http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=459678&highlight=5ghz

 

[Serius]

pfft you wont hit 5ghz without phase change or vapo chill lol

 

[Collin]

Wasn't it proved long ago that more speed doesn't mean better performance anymore?

Hahahahaha, what?

OCing that Conroe to 5.0GHz isn't generally worth the effort for anything, but I'd certainly OC it to 3.5GHz to boost my benchies and game performance.

And define 'normal consumer'. A person who buys a 2.4GHz Conroe would likely be an enthusiast; also a 'normal consumer' for customers of that product base. Many hardware enthusiastics overclock their computer components, and I'd hardly label them with the attribute of having half-a-brain.

Many people OC for bragging rights, but to deny that it gives any performance advantage renders me baffled.

 

[Templar]

The speed not equal performance thing only applies to different architecture. In a similar architecture higher clock speed certainly means increased performance, it's just a case of diminishing returns (overclocking something by 50% doesn't mean 50% more performance, maybe only 30%), although Yonah seem to have linear increase in performance with clockspeed increases of over 40%.

In fact, why would nobody overclock? If so, why bother bring out new products? Every now and again, the hardware needs to push just that little extra, and overclocking can help when you can't justify the cost to upgrade (eg my 6800GT is being overclocked to beyond Ultra performance so I can play AOE3 at highest setting at 1280).

The Conroe architecture is different to the Netburst employed in P4s. Netburst sacrificed latency for speed, and 5GHz is easily achieved using liquid nitrogen or dry ice. The world record is over 7GHz.

 

[Collin]

You're blinded by your own stupidity and lack of common sense, polidick, and it's becoming far too common from you.

You say that overclocking gives no usefulness and that a higher clock does not mean a better performance. Then you eat your own words and assume that it offers 'some' performance advantage. What what? Trying to save face are we?

Intel and AMD moved away from ramping up clock speed because it gave no advantage in performance? I think you've hit your head on the pavement a bit too hard this time round. Just think about what you said there before.
To add insult to injury (to your argument) -- since we're heading towards more efficient processors nowadays which can do more work per clock cycle, increasing the clock cycle itself should give an even bigger performance advantage.

OCing itself like Templar mentioned rarely results in a proportional increase in performance. But if it's reasonably easy to OC certain processors, what's the problem? Furthermore, Yonah (like Templar mentioned once more), and it's similarly derived Conroe boasts a near-linear increase in performance for OCs upto a certain level.

Also, it's not 'most hardware enthusiasts with a bit of common sense realise that cons far outweigh the pros'; it's 'most hardware enthusiasts with a bit of common sense realise that the cons far outweigh the pros if they have no clue what they're doing'. Finally, most enthusiasts who purchase CPUs more expensive than any other component in their machine, e.g video card (which usually can top over $1,000 since they're performance enthusiasts) would usually have some knowledge and will to OC to an extent. Why on Earth do many enthusiasts even go for good DFI mobos and processors such as AMD Venice core, Opterons for gaming etc.? Because it gives better overclockability.

Learn to abandon a sinking ship dude, cause this is definitely one of the more pathetic arguments you decided to stick your foot in.

 

[SashatheMan]

5 ghz , hmmm.

and here i am running my 3 ghz pentium like a sucka

 

[Collin]

Fanboy? Do you know what a 'fanboy' is? Hahahaha.

Once again you opt out with the 'I'm right but can't be bothered arguing anymore' line. Next time, try the 'I admit I'm wrong' approach, or better, don't get into absurd arguments in the first place, if your ego is having a nap.

Sasha: Don't worry man, I'm on a similar boat with you with my 2.2GHz AMD.

 

[breaking]

stfuplz

 

[Collin]

It can be resolved, but because you're wrong and you know it, as usual bail out and coat it with a 'I cbf' attitude. Pussy polidick, pussy. And I really suggest you learn what a fanboy is before you go throwing words like that around, dolt.

Now, back to discussing Conroe (or any AMD solutions) instead of going into trivially stupid arguments started by douche bags with egos significantly denser than their own brains.


HI BREAKING

 

[Serius]

Fanboy? Do you know what a 'fanboy' is? Hahahaha.

Once again you opt out with the 'I'm right but can't be bothered arguing anymore' line. Next time, try the 'I admit I'm wrong' approach, or better, don't get into absurd arguments in the first place, if your ego is having a nap.

Sasha: Don't worry man, I'm on a similar boat with you with my 2.2GHz AMD.

Bah my clockspeed is 2.21! beat that!

/colin goes to overclock to 2.4

 

[Collin]

Nah man, I can't OC jack with my skt754 Newcastle 3200+/ASUS K8v setup. I'd say that I could probably only raise it upto 2.35.. totally not worth the effort.

 

[Templar]

Yeah, I have a similar problem with overclocking a Prescott 3.2 to anything higher than 3.5. Perfectly stable at 3.4, so I'm not sure if it's the RAM, or I need to disable the auto function to apply more voltage. Either way it's not really worth it, seeing that I do run Prime95 on it for GIMPS so I'd sacrifice a little speed for absolute stability.

GPU overclocking is more fruitful but it also doesn't seem to be able to achieve what I want, but for some reason the Prescott 3.2/6800GT configuration is beating a A64 4000+/6800GT configuration at stock, and is better than the 6800Ultra reference when overclocked to 390/1100, so I'm happy with it.

 

[Collin]

Yeah, I have a real itch for stability. Since my current desktop is for games aswell as productivity/work/uni (atleast until a second gen DX10 card comes out.. in which case then I'll have 3 operational PCs), I need it to be stable at all times. The one time I experimented with my current processor led me to a brick wall at even 2.3GHz. It was stable, but JUST.. and that was with me altering the voltage too. Before I built this rig, some people told me that I'd be screwed up the butt if I wanted to OC, and boy looks like they weren't kidding.

At the moment I've pushed my X800XT-PE to ~570/610 easy, pretty much a 50MHz for both core and mem. For absolutely stability I keep it around 555/590.. a 6-7% OC.. and in benchmarking it on average tends to give a ~5% performance boost. As for your Prescott 3.2 beating a 4000+.. what the feck?

I considered getting an Opteron 170 a little while ago. Those babies seem to OC pretty well. If I'm lucky I might take my amateur OCing skills to push it upto 2.6GHz air and hence give myself a cheap FX-60.. kinda. Hahahah. One dude I know pushed his 170 to 3.16 on water @ 1.53v prime stable. He's kinda anal when it comes to buying CPUs.. he HAS to choose one with a good stepping -- handpicked.

 

[Templar]

My fault for not stating the benchmark...it was 3DMark05, which isn't directly CPU affected, and 3DMark06, where we know Intel single core is better than A64, possibly due to hyperthreading. Otherwise I don't expect it to even beat a 3500+ in anything (apart from Prime95, where Intel actually beat AMD clockspeed for clockspeed).

The Opteron 165 is an overclocking monster, easily stepped up to FX60. Although for pure value in overclocking the Intel 805D, with 20x multiplier, is far ahead of any competition. At 4GHz it will better any Smithfield offering at stock (but it does expend a mighty 200W+ of heat!).

Stepping matters a lot in overclocking. My Prescott is D0. Had it been N0 it would have hit 4.0GHz easily on air. Similarly the B0 stepping of Conroe is far superior in overclocking than the initial A0. Too bad you can't spot stepping except on the barcode, and when you go with the cheapest vendor like me, which could have no warehouse to visit, you have no control over stepping.