Conroe 2.4GHz benchmarked

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Shenkoa

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: 996GT2
I know this was on page 5 of the "Intel's conroe in the hands..." thread, but I posted this just to make sure everyone can easily see it

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=95021&page=1

EDIT: FIxed link

These numbers are way to high to be realistic, I would not be suprised if Intel has created the Conroe with a special unit inside of it that makes it produce high numbers in benchmark application.

Imo their marketing team are scum.

Fellow AT'ers, can I get a "Just Wow!"

why the heck did you mess up my quote i never said that!
I said "this is the omg of the week! "

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Shenkoa

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: 996GT2
I know this was on page 5 of the "Intel's conroe in the hands..." thread, but I posted this just to make sure everyone can easily see it

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=95021&page=1

EDIT: FIxed link

These numbers are way to high to be realistic, I would not be suprised if Intel has created the Conroe with a special unit inside of it that makes it produce high numbers in benchmark application.

Imo their marketing team are scum.

Fellow AT'ers, can I get a "Just Wow!"

why the heck did you mess up my quote i never said that!
I said "this is the omg of the week! "

i saw you say that exact thing...... nothing is wrongly quoted

 

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Shenkoa

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: 996GT2
I know this was on page 5 of the "Intel's conroe in the hands..." thread, but I posted this just to make sure everyone can easily see it

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=95021&page=1

EDIT: FIxed link

These numbers are way to high to be realistic, I would not be suprised if Intel has created the Conroe with a special unit inside of it that makes it produce high numbers in benchmark application.

Imo their marketing team are scum.

Fellow AT'ers, can I get a "Just Wow!"

why the heck did you mess up my quote i never said that!
I said "this is the omg of the week! "

i saw you say that exact thing...... nothing is wrongly quoted

no look at thread i never said that i am after all an intel fan boy. First Page 3rd post.

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Shenkoa

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: 996GT2
I know this was on page 5 of the "Intel's conroe in the hands..." thread, but I posted this just to make sure everyone can easily see it

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=95021&page=1

EDIT: FIxed link

These numbers are way to high to be realistic, I would not be suprised if Intel has created the Conroe with a special unit inside of it that makes it produce high numbers in benchmark application.

Imo their marketing team are scum.

Fellow AT'ers, can I get a "Just Wow!"

why the heck did you mess up my quote i never said that!
I said "this is the omg of the week! "

i saw you say that exact thing...... nothing is wrongly quoted

no look at thread i never said that i am after all an intel fan boy. First Page 3rd post.

whoa.... sorry man shenkoa is the idiot that said that

 

[swtethan]

many apologies

 

[designit]

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: designit
Oh yes it does. Have you seen how the smart memory or Dynamic execution works?
if the cpu is overclocked, those 2 will go to an endless loop---->CRASH

Can you clarify the chip you are referring to?

Regardless, if an overclock results in a crash, then it is because there exists timing paths in the logic of that particular function, and one or more of those paths did not have enough timing margin to accomodate a given overclock. The fact that it was functional at a lower frequency means the function is validated and working.

I am talking about conroe of course.
I don?t know much about the cpu architecture, but what I can gather from reading how this new "Core Architecture" is designed, I have a strong premonition that it can not be overclocked. six x86 Instruction being executed in one clock cycle seems to much already. And you want to overclock the sucker too?
read this:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=217

 

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: designit

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: designit
Oh yes it does. Have you seen how the smart memory or Dynamic execution works?
if the cpu is overclocked, those 2 will go to an endless loop---->CRASH

Can you clarify the chip you are referring to?

Regardless, if an overclock results in a crash, then it is because there exists timing paths in the logic of that particular function, and one or more of those paths did not have enough timing margin to accomodate a given overclock. The fact that it was functional at a lower frequency means the function is validated and working.

I am talking about conroe of course.
I don?t know much about the cpu architecture, but what I can gather from reading how this new "Core Architecture" is designed, I have a strong premonition that it can not be overclocked. six x86 Instruction being executed in one clock cycle seems to much already. And you want to overclock the sucker too?
read this:
Instruction being executed so you are essentially getting

Of course you can overclock the cpu How much is the question.
we know that core can hit 3Ghz plus with a 333FSB. The cores should opperate at same frecency so shared l2 should cause no problems.

 

[dmens]

OK, well I don't know how the chip can go into a livelock by overclocking, other than a timing failure. Just because the machine is wider, timing margins reclaimed can be stretched by a variety of methods, such as repipelining or aggressive circuit topologies. Overclocking is always a possibility.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Cooler

why the heck did you mess up my quote i never said that!
I said "this is the omg of the week! "

Sorry Cooler, my bad. I fixed it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: designit

I am talking about conroe of course.
I don?t know much about the cpu architecture, but what I can gather from reading how this new "Core Architecture" is designed, I have a strong premonition that it can not be overclocked. six x86 Instruction being executed in one clock cycle seems to much already. And you want to overclock the sucker too?
read this:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=217

You don't know much about the cpu architecture, yet you feel qualified enough to make a "premonition" that they can't be overclocked. What difference is it if there are 6 x86 instructions or 6 million? There are no "rev-limiters" built into processors, just multiplier locks. The fact alone that there will be EE edition 3.33Ghz chips is enough all by itself as evidence that these CPU's can operate much higher than 2.4GHz. If ever there was something pulled out of one's methane orafice, this is it. (With all due respect)

spelling corrections edit.

 

[formulav8]

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Intel did not want these chips to oc and even put somekind of limit on purpose. They tried to limit ocing with s775? P4 Mobo's. So, don't be to surprised if it comes out that the ocing success is limited with these cpu's. Less ocing ='s more money for Intel to get from people wanting faster chips.


Jason

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: formulav8
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Intel did not want these chips to oc and even put somekind of limit on purpose. They tried to limit ocing with s775? P4 Mobo's. So, don't be to surprised if it comes out that the ocing success is limited with these cpu's. Less ocing ='s more money for Intel to get from people wanting faster chips.


Jason

I would be very surprised. Intel has NEVER done this in the past with any CPU. The only thing they ever did was lock the multi. What on earth makes anyone think they would start doing this now? Where did this initial idea start from and who "thunk" it up? Is it from a PR spin somewhere? Intel WANTS their chips to o/c for the enthusiast market. You think they don't know that enthusiasts buy lower end and o/c? Fortunately for Intel, the enthusiast market is a miniscule market compared to Joe average who will buy whatever is in the dang PC. So, it won't hurt Intel to allow these to o/c as it would be for a very small market segment that wouldn't just buy the high end right off the bat.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Intel hasn't put "rev limiters" on CPUs before, but they have put them on motherboard chipsets(albeit with limited success).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX
Intel hasn't put "rev limiters" on CPUs before, but they have put them on motherboard chipsets(albeit with limited success).

That's true. But that's why we have ASUS, Abit, DFI, Gigabyte, etc. etc.

 

[swtethan]

oh snap i hit red line on my conroe the other day, had too much NOS

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: designit
Dont be so optimistice about overclocking this new "Core Architecture" (conroe I mean).
Because of Advance shared cache, wide Dynamic execution, and smart memory access Intel has implemented, these new chips are unclockable. Yes you will be able to overclock them, but nothing will be stable, and nothing will pass. Another word corrupted OS and system. Why do you think no one has been able to overclock conroe as we have seen a few tests already (by the exterme overclocking experts)?
Every time they tried to overclock it, system crashed. They blame it on BIOS, but dont count on new bios to fix it. IT CAN NOT OVERCLOCK as stated the reasons above.
Who is going to put a wager on my prediction?

Me Me Me! So what's at stake? Btw, I like how you use the marketing terms "Wide Dynamic Execution" and "Smart Memory Access" to justify your belief. So anyways, what are we wagering?

 

[the Chase]

I know this isn't about Conroe but it is in the thread that we are talking about. There are now three different members that are hinting/basically saying that AM2 will be faster than Conroe! One of them is a OCZ memory rep. that I might think has some inside knowledge. But all they say is "wait and see" and "you will be impressed" with no juicy details!! Also nn_step who seems very up on his reading/knowledge keeps saying that an M2 is coming out also and is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT than AM2 and he also hints at it beating Conroe. Could AMD have a bombshell tucked up under it's sleeve??

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: designit
Dont be so optimistice about overclocking this new "Core Architecture" (conroe I mean).
Because of Advance shared cache, wide Dynamic execution, and smart memory access Intel has implemented, these new chips are unclockable. Yes you will be able to overclock them, but nothing will be stable, and nothing will pass. Another word corrupted OS and system. Why do you think no one has been able to overclock conroe as we have seen a few tests already (by the exterme overclocking experts)?
Every time they tried to overclock it, system crashed. They blame it on BIOS, but dont count on new bios to fix it. IT CAN NOT OVERCLOCK as stated the reasons above.
Who is going to put a wager on my prediction?

Me Me Me! So what's at stake? Btw, I like how you use the marketing terms "Wide Dynamic Execution" and "Smart Memory Access" to justify your belief. So anyways, what are we wagering?

How about the loser buys the winner a retail mainstream (2.4/2.66) conroe when they discover if the conroe overclocks or not. Whatever the retail price is at that time.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: the Chase
I know this isn't about Conroe but it is in the thread that we are talking about. There are now three different members that are hinting/basically saying that AM2 will be faster than Conroe! One of them is a OCZ memory rep. that I might think has some inside knowledge. But all they say is "wait and see" and "you will be impressed" with no juicy details!! Also nn_step who seems very up on his reading/knowledge keeps saying that an M2 is coming out also and is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT than AM2 and he also hints at it beating Conroe. Could AMD have a bombshell tucked up under it's sleeve??

I'm the first one to say "anything is possible". But it's not probable. At least not until 2007 rolls around. Methinks.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: designit
Dont be so optimistice about overclocking this new "Core Architecture" (conroe I mean).
Because of Advance shared cache, wide Dynamic execution, and smart memory access Intel has implemented, these new chips are unclockable. Yes you will be able to overclock them, but nothing will be stable, and nothing will pass. Another word corrupted OS and system. Why do you think no one has been able to overclock conroe as we have seen a few tests already (by the exterme overclocking experts)?
Every time they tried to overclock it, system crashed. They blame it on BIOS, but dont count on new bios to fix it. IT CAN NOT OVERCLOCK as stated the reasons above.
Who is going to put a wager on my prediction?

Me Me Me! So what's at stake? Btw, I like how you use the marketing terms "Wide Dynamic Execution" and "Smart Memory Access" to justify your belief. So anyways, what are we wagering?

How about the loser buys the winner a retail mainstream (2.4/2.66) conroe when they discover if the conroe overclocks or not. Whatever the retail price is at that time.

 

[the Chase]

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: designit
Dont be so optimistice about overclocking this new "Core Architecture" (conroe I mean).
Because of Advance shared cache, wide Dynamic execution, and smart memory access Intel has implemented, these new chips are unclockable. Yes you will be able to overclock them, but nothing will be stable, and nothing will pass. Another word corrupted OS and system. Why do you think no one has been able to overclock conroe as we have seen a few tests already (by the exterme overclocking experts)?
Every time they tried to overclock it, system crashed. They blame it on BIOS, but dont count on new bios to fix it. IT CAN NOT OVERCLOCK as stated the reasons above.
Who is going to put a wager on my prediction?

Me Me Me! So what's at stake? Btw, I like how you use the marketing terms "Wide Dynamic Execution" and "Smart Memory Access" to justify your belief. So anyways, what are we wagering?

How about the loser buys the winner a retail mainstream (2.4/2.66) conroe when they discover if the conroe overclocks or not. Whatever the retail price is at that time.

 

[designit]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: designit

I am talking about conroe of course.
I don?t know much about the cpu architecture, but what I can gather from reading how this new "Core Architecture" is designed, I have a strong premonition that it can not be overclocked. six x86 Instruction being executed in one clock cycle seems to much already. And you want to overclock the sucker too?
read this:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=217

You don't know much about the cpu architecture, yet you feel qualified enough to make a "premonition" that they can't be overclocked. What difference is it if there are 6 x86 instructions or 6 million? There are no "rev-limiters" built into processors, just multiplier locks. The fact alone that there will be EE edition 3.33Ghz chips is enough all by itself as evidence that these CPU's can operate much higher than 2.4GHz. If ever there was something pulled out of one's methane orafice, this is it. (With all due respect)

spelling corrections edit.

For what you wrote, It appears that, at least, I know more than you do.
Have you been able to overclock Dothan? it is know fact that Dothan is limited in overclocking. Share cache efficiency ring a bell to you?
We know the "Core Architecture" has derived from Dothan and is designed to be power efficient (hint hint).
I know some of you Intel enthusiast are just tickled to death about this conroe, and wish you can overclock it to heaven; or presume "AMD is DEAD", so many of you have stated.
I said I don?t know much about core architecture (maybe modest) but at least do my homework. as said: I have a premonition, about un-overclock-ability of conroe after reading several detailed analysis of the "Core Architecture".
Well, I feel for you man. ?If I don?t like what he says I just ridicule him? a typical pattern.

http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editor...es/archive/c0604/20c04/20c04.asp&guid=

http://techreport.com/etc/2005q3/idf/index.x?pg=2

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: designit

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: designit

I am talking about conroe of course.
I don?t know much about the cpu architecture, but what I can gather from reading how this new "Core Architecture" is designed, I have a strong premonition that it can not be overclocked. six x86 Instruction being executed in one clock cycle seems to much already. And you want to overclock the sucker too?
read this:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=217

You don't know much about the cpu architecture, yet you feel qualified enough to make a "premonition" that they can't be overclocked. What difference is it if there are 6 x86 instructions or 6 million? There are no "rev-limiters" built into processors, just multiplier locks. The fact alone that there will be EE edition 3.33Ghz chips is enough all by itself as evidence that these CPU's can operate much higher than 2.4GHz. If ever there was something pulled out of one's methane orafice, this is it. (With all due respect)

spelling corrections edit.

For what you wrote, It appears that, at least, I know more than you do.
Have you been able to overclock Dothan? it is know fact that Dothan is limited in overclocking. Share cache efficiency ring a bell to you?
We know the "Core Architecture" has derived from Dothan and is designed to be power efficient (hint hint).
I know some of you Intel enthusiast are just tickled to death about this conroe, and wish you can overclock it to heaven; or presume "AMD is DEAD", so many of you have stated.
I said I don?t know much about core architecture (maybe modest) but at least do my homework. as said: I have a premonition, about un-overclock-ability of conroe after reading several detailed analysis of the "Core Architecture".
Well, I feel for you man. ?If I don?t like what he says I just ridicule him? a typical pattern.

http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editor...es/archive/c0604/20c04/20c04.asp&guid=

http://techreport.com/etc/2005q3/idf/index.x?pg=2

To be very clear, when you claim 'un-overclockability' do you mean if I buy a 2.4GHz Conroe, i cannot bump it to any speed above it?

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: designit

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: designit

I am talking about conroe of course.
I don?t know much about the cpu architecture, but what I can gather from reading how this new "Core Architecture" is designed, I have a strong premonition that it can not be overclocked. six x86 Instruction being executed in one clock cycle seems to much already. And you want to overclock the sucker too?
read this:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=217

You don't know much about the cpu architecture, yet you feel qualified enough to make a "premonition" that they can't be overclocked. What difference is it if there are 6 x86 instructions or 6 million? There are no "rev-limiters" built into processors, just multiplier locks. The fact alone that there will be EE edition 3.33Ghz chips is enough all by itself as evidence that these CPU's can operate much higher than 2.4GHz. If ever there was something pulled out of one's methane orafice, this is it. (With all due respect)

spelling corrections edit.

For what you wrote, It appears that, at least, I know more than you do.
Have you been able to overclock Dothan? it is know fact that Dothan is limited in overclocking. Share cache efficiency ring a bell to you?
We know the "Core Architecture" has derived from Dothan and is designed to be power efficient (hint hint).
I know some of you Intel enthusiast are just tickled to death about this conroe, and wish you can overclock it to heaven; or presume "AMD is DEAD", so many of you have stated.
I said I don?t know much about core architecture (maybe modest) but at least do my homework. as said: I have a premonition, about un-overclock-ability of conroe after reading several detailed analysis of the "Core Architecture".
Well, I feel for you man. ?If I don?t like what he says I just ridicule him? a typical pattern.

http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editor...es/archive/c0604/20c04/20c04.asp&guid=

http://techreport.com/etc/2005q3/idf/index.x?pg=2

Yeah, dothan doesn't OC very well at all, I mean I only got a 50% overclock on my 1.6 dothan on stock voltage..that is so much worse than my 3.2 prescotts that won't go past 3.6, or the 18% OC on my X2. Such horrible overclocking.

 

[dmens]

We know the "Core Architecture" has derived from Dothan and is designed to be power efficient (hint hint).

If the design frequency is low due to a lower power target, then a chip is argually going to be better at overclocking than a chip that has a high frequency target. High frequency parts such as P4 tend to reach their targets with speed steps (read: brute force), and in general oversized paths are modeled optimistically, as opposed to design-for-power and paths with smaller gates, which tend to have pessimistic models, as long as the sizing is within the design corners.

However, merom is more aggressively designed than other p-m's, so 50% overclocks might be harder to come by... but considering there's 3.0ghz parts working on stock voltage, seems like 4ghz is a distinct possibility.