Turn your £79 chip into an Extreme Edition beater - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 11th May 2006, 16:20

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/05...dition_beater/

rupbert · 11th May 2006, 16:31

This surely is just a good cpu, surely this level of overclocking won't be attainable with every cpu?

Glider · 11th May 2006, 16:44

OC'ing is 5% knowledge 5% budget and 90% luck on the chip, well this is one of those times that the odds were all right...

Redbeaver · 11th May 2006, 16:49

*drool*

im still gettin this CPU this weekend lol i got a s775 lying around somewhere.... bloody hell, for $100.... why not....

ch424 · 11th May 2006, 17:05

This reminds me of the Celeron D 356 that went to 5GHz. However, that only had 256k of L2 cache, while this has plenty...

on!

ch424

specofdust · 11th May 2006, 17:06

Quote:

This represents a heretofore-unattained clock rate increase of just over 54 %, for which only some additional cooling is required.

Absolute tosh, XtremeSystems members have beaten 54% on several occasions. The idiocy of suggesting some dude at toms could beat an XS'r at clocking into oblivion is just plain naive.

Still, sounds like a stonking chip. I might even be intrested, if it didn't mean buying a new mobo and RAM. As it is, I'll stick to AMD.

z4114 · 11th May 2006, 17:14

Only 54%? Pff... The Opteron 165 can surpass that on the stock cooler. Here's one of my own OCs on the 165. CPU-Z Validation at 2.943GHz. The stock speed of the 165 is 1.8 so doing the quick math gives us a 63.5% increase. Granted the Opty 165 is around $330 USD I spose Intel has snatched up the budget processor overclock crown.

rupbert · 11th May 2006, 17:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by specofdust

Absolute tosh, XtremeSystems members have beaten 54% on several occasions. The idiocy of suggesting some dude at toms could beat an XS'r at clocking into oblivion is just plain naive.

Good point.

Firehed · 11th May 2006, 17:21

Very nice... if only I had any desire to buy a new chip and mobo just to do that. As it is, my fileserver box really doesn't need the cl0x0rs like a gaming rig would (though IIRC, most of the X2's still beat the 805@4.1 in gaming) but it's the only one in the house with an LGA board. And a 915 board at that, which I'm not sure supports dual-core chips.

Still, good news for anyone with a budget.

zr_ox · 11th May 2006, 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by specofdust

Absolute tosh, XtremeSystems members have beaten 54% on several occasions

Maybe true but are they not using peltiers and liquid nitrogen at those speeds? This was done using standard watercooling.

Like said before, everything went right for them this time round. What would have made the article very interesting would have been two chips put through the wringer!

I can imagine that there are going to be alot of dissapointed people.

turbosatan · 11th May 2006, 17:35

there was a feature in CustomPC mag last month about this chip being able to go up to 3.6 ghz with standard air cooling which i thought was pretty impressive.

4.1 is a huge overclock from 2.6 but i think the page on toms hardware which looks at why intel have done this should be the point of discussion.

are intel trying to get the overclocking crowds attention?

many oc'ers are devoutly AMD based but if this is what we can expect from intel then maybe a shift is due.

they certainly got my attention when i saw that headline.

but hey if AMD make a dual core cpu capable of 4.1 ghz for under £100 i would still buy AMD

Mr Sniper · 11th May 2006, 18:22

Well this is an eye opener, i must say i'm not the biggest fan of intel. But with the previews of conroe and now this i'm seriously considering moving to them.

As a budget upgrade it works perfect for me, i'm actually in the process of deciding whether to upgrade or not as i'm going to Uni in Sept. But with this in mind and a bit of luck that a chip i order can do the same then i'll go in the deep end and go with Intel. Has anyone got any more info on this from XS for example?

bloodcar · 11th May 2006, 18:24

If this is true of average over clocks for this chip, I might buy one shorty. I'm in desperate need of a new system and this might provide me with an affordable upgrade onto the new platforms. Hopefully bit can get a hold of one and test Tom's results.

RotoSequence · 11th May 2006, 19:02

The latest edition of Computer Power User (CPU) also did the same test. While they didnt get quite as high (4.02 GHz), the results are starting to look fairly universal. CPU used a watercooling unit for cooling, but it still ran at around 115° Fahrenheit (46.1° Celsius) under load.

Looks like this may yet be the greatest overclocker in a long while

Tim S · 11th May 2006, 19:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotoSequence

The latest edition of Computer Power User (CPU) also did the same test. While they didnt get quite as high (4.02 GHz), the results are starting to look fairly universal. CPU used a watercooling unit for cooling, but it still ran at around 115° Fahrenheit (46.1° Celsius) under load.

Looks like this may yet be the greatest overclocker in a long while

It's like the 2.4E all over again (a Prescott with a 533MHz bus speed). I think Macci achieved more than a 100% overclock.

Mr Sniper · 11th May 2006, 20:03

The interesting thing about Tom's article is that is doesnt say what syste they have used. Which makes is quite frustrating not to be able to compare to other people's overclocks with this processor.

Any ideas of the spec they used?

Paradigm Shifter · 11th May 2006, 22:14

I'm impressed (and I'm also counting pennies

) but my focus at the minute is on purchasing an Opteron 170. I moved from Intel a long time ago, and while I like their mobile chips (post Banias, at least...) their desktop space-heater/power-suckers just don't interest me.

Of course, when Conroe comes round, I'll be watching the TDP of that very closely...

Then again... for £80 or so, who's countin'...?

WarningFromSpace · 11th May 2006, 22:33

True this is a great overclock, but dont forget the chip pulls over 200 watts of pwr and requires watercooling for 4+ghz. Not only that but the chip ran 50C idle. In my opinion getting a 3700+ San Diego and clocking it up to fx57 speeds on stock cooling for 200 is a much better buy.

Lazlow · 11th May 2006, 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Sniper

As a budget upgrade it works perfect for me, i'm actually in the process of deciding whether to upgrade or not as i'm going to Uni in Sept.

Trust me, upgrade now. You'll find it a bi*ch to upgrade whilst as a student at University - the money will go elsewhere. Get a decent upgrade in now, then it should last you the 3/4 years.

I want to hear stories from others getting the same, or at least a similar overclock from this. I'm going to be purchasing a new rig come the end of June and this might sway me from my 3800 X2 current choice.

yahooadam · 11th May 2006, 22:52

why do the pictures have a drill and swarf on the chip

from what i read of the review (omg why does tom's hardware allways have 25+ pages on their reviews) they havent actually moded the chip in any way

11th May 2006, 16:20	#1
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	Turn your £79 chip into an Extreme Edition beater http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/05...dition_beater/ __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

11th May 2006, 16:44	#3
Glider /dev/null Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 4,102	OC'ing is 5% knowledge 5% budget and 90% luck on the chip, well this is one of those times that the odds were all right... __________________ There Are 10 Types Of People, Those Who Know Binary and Those Who Don't

11th May 2006, 17:21	#9
Firehed Why not? I own a domain to match. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: An hour north of Boston Posts: 12,576	Very nice... if only I had any desire to buy a new chip and mobo just to do that. As it is, my fileserver box really doesn't need the cl0x0rs like a gaming rig would (though IIRC, most of the X2's still beat the 805@4.1 in gaming) but it's the only one in the house with an LGA board. And a 915 board at that, which I'm not sure supports dual-core chips. Still, good news for anyone with a budget. __________________ hire me @ eric-stern.com - web developer and php ninja pics @ my smugmug :: Twitter @firehed :: blog @ firehed.net 40D\|580EXII\|285HV\|AB800\|70-200f/4LIS\|17-50f/2.8\|150f/2.8Macro\|50f/1.8 MacPro @ 8x2.8GHz, 10GB FBDDR2, 3TB HD :: MBP @ 2x2.2GHz, 4GB DDR2, 320GB HD

11th May 2006, 18:24	#13
bloodcar Mod Master Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Mentor, OH Posts: 2,133	If this is true of average over clocks for this chip, I might buy one shorty. I'm in desperate need of a new system and this might provide me with an affordable upgrade onto the new platforms. Hopefully bit can get a hold of one and test Tom's results. __________________ <+DougEdey> you getting PGR4 mitmit? <mitmit> not me, Geoff is probably wanking like a lepper at the thought of it though

11th May 2006, 19:02	#14
RotoSequence Lazy Lurker Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: 'States Posts: 4,527	The latest edition of Computer Power User (CPU) also did the same test. While they didnt get quite as high (4.02 GHz), the results are starting to look fairly universal. CPU used a watercooling unit for cooling, but it still ran at around 115° Fahrenheit (46.1° Celsius) under load. Looks like this may yet be the greatest overclocker in a long while __________________ Technology Schmecnology

11th May 2006, 16:31	#2
rupbert Hypermodder Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Northern Ireland Posts: 799	This surely is just a good cpu, surely this level of overclocking won't be attainable with every cpu?

11th May 2006, 16:49	#4
Redbeaver Hypermodder Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Ontario, CANADA Posts: 718	drool im still gettin this CPU this weekend lol i got a s775 lying around somewhere.... bloody hell, for $100.... why not....

11th May 2006, 17:05	#5
ch424 Design Warrior Join Date: May 2004 Location: Oxford, UK Posts: 2,510	This reminds me of the Celeron D 356 that went to 5GHz. However, that only had 256k of L2 cache, while this has plenty... on! ch424

11th May 2006, 17:14	#7
z4114 FACE! Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Kentucky, USA Posts: 285	Only 54%? Pff... The Opteron 165 can surpass that on the stock cooler. Here's one of my own OCs on the 165. CPU-Z Validation at 2.943GHz. The stock speed of the 165 is 1.8 so doing the quick math gives us a 63.5% increase. Granted the Opty 165 is around $330 USD I spose Intel has snatched up the budget processor overclock crown.

11th May 2006, 17:35	#11
turbosatan Multimodder Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: uk Posts: 135	there was a feature in CustomPC mag last month about this chip being able to go up to 3.6 ghz with standard air cooling which i thought was pretty impressive. 4.1 is a huge overclock from 2.6 but i think the page on toms hardware which looks at why intel have done this should be the point of discussion. are intel trying to get the overclocking crowds attention? many oc'ers are devoutly AMD based but if this is what we can expect from intel then maybe a shift is due. they certainly got my attention when i saw that headline. but hey if AMD make a dual core cpu capable of 4.1 ghz for under £100 i would still buy AMD

11th May 2006, 18:22	#12
Mr Sniper What's a Dremel? Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Berkshire, UK Posts: 6	Well this is an eye opener, i must say i'm not the biggest fan of intel. But with the previews of conroe and now this i'm seriously considering moving to them. As a budget upgrade it works perfect for me, i'm actually in the process of deciding whether to upgrade or not as i'm going to Uni in Sept. But with this in mind and a bit of luck that a chip i order can do the same then i'll go in the deep end and go with Intel. Has anyone got any more info on this from XS for example?

11th May 2006, 20:03	#16
Mr Sniper What's a Dremel? Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Berkshire, UK Posts: 6	The interesting thing about Tom's article is that is doesnt say what syste they have used. Which makes is quite frustrating not to be able to compare to other people's overclocks with this processor. Any ideas of the spec they used?

11th May 2006, 22:14	#17
Paradigm Shifter Lethargic Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,210	I'm impressed (and I'm also counting pennies ) but my focus at the minute is on purchasing an Opteron 170. I moved from Intel a long time ago, and while I like their mobile chips (post Banias, at least...) their desktop space-heater/power-suckers just don't interest me. Of course, when Conroe comes round, I'll be watching the TDP of that very closely... Then again... for £80 or so, who's countin'...? __________________ Core i7 920 D0 @ 3.8GHz \| 6GB Corsair 1600MHz \| Gigabyte EX58-UD5 \| XFX 4870X2 2GB \| 4TB \| WUXGA

11th May 2006, 22:33	#18
WarningFromSpace Modder Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Space Posts: 52	True this is a great overclock, but dont forget the chip pulls over 200 watts of pwr and requires watercooling for 4+ghz. Not only that but the chip ran 50C idle. In my opinion getting a 3700+ San Diego and clocking it up to fx57 speeds on stock cooling for 200 is a much better buy.

11th May 2006, 22:52	#20
yahooadam Ultra csavarkulcs Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: UK Posts: 1,323	why do the pictures have a drill and swarf on the chip from what i read of the review (omg why does tom's hardware allways have 25+ pages on their reviews) they havent actually moded the chip in any way