Phenom 2 at 6Ghz(!)

[soccerballtux]

Text

5Ghz on Dry Ice and 1.6v. Wow.

/. discussion

 

[Stoneburner]

Unspossibles! THis may match i7 at 5.3 ghz!

I hate when these kinds of numbers drop before the important stuff.

 

[JackyP]

WTF it doesn't coldbug? Is this the promised magic sauce? I am AMAZED.
Still I don't believe it might compete with i7 for stock-performance.

 

[Kraeoss]

this hardens my resolve to start preparing for this chip futher.... all i need is 4GHz even 3.5 Ghz from amd

 

[Cogman]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Unspossibles! THis may match i7 at 5.3 ghz!

I hate when these kinds of numbers drop before the important stuff.

Phenom was somewhat comparable to the C2Q, the biggest holdback for it was the the C2Q was able to overclock like mad. With the possibility that the phenom II overclocks like crazy, could be comparable to Penrynn in speed, and will possibly (most likely) be cheaper then intels offerings is good news.

Now, you're right, these numbers aren't all that meaningful. However, I think it is a safe assumption that the phenom II will be faster clock for clock then the Phenom I (how much remains to be seen). Couple that with big overclocking potential and you have yourself a potential bargin.

Lets hope thats the case for AMD's sake.

 

[Martimus]

Wow! 6GHz on LN at 1.9V. Maybe 4GHz on the BE processor might be attainable with a good air cooling setup.

 

[Kraeoss]

Originally posted by: Martimus
Wow! 6GHz on LN at 1.9V. Maybe 4GHz on the BE processor might be attainable with a good air cooling setup.

indeed :thumbsup:

 

[masteryoda34]

How can they run this chip with 1.9v. Wouldn't that kill it extremely fast?

 

[Kraeoss]

Originally posted by: masteryoda34
How can they run this chip with 1.9v. Wouldn't that kill it extremely fast?

hrmm... those are just tests to tell how far the cpu can reach. the cooler the cpu the less damage it gets from the voltage but realtime i doubt anyone will run the cpu at that high a vcore.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: masteryoda34
How can they run this chip with 1.9v. Wouldn't that kill it extremely fast?

The people doing this kind of thing only needs it to last as long as the Liquid N2 in the tank.

 

[Nathelion]

Those kinds of speeds (and those kinds of voltages) are usually only sustained for just long enough to boot into windows and get a screenshot. The chip is most likely far from fully stable, and would die within hours at most if kept at those voltages.

Edit: Keep in mind that Prescott reached 8 GHz+ on LN cooling.

 

[Cookie Monster]

techreport

AMD overclocks 45nm Phenoms to 4GHz and beyond
by Cyril Kowaliski ? 1:47 PM on November 20, 2008

According to AMD's latest roadmaps, 45nm Phenom II processors are just a few weeks away from launch?they'll materialize at the Consumer Electronic Show in early January. Not a bad time to start gauging the overclocking potential of these chips, right?

AMD took care of that itself at an event in Austin this morning, where it showcased four overclocked Phenom II systems. TR editor-in-chief Scott Wasson was on the scene, and while AMD didn't allow attendees to take pictures, he jotted down a few details.

The slowest system?cooled with a heatsink and fan?managed to reach just under 4GHz with a 1.55V core voltage. With liquid cooling, AMD successfully pushed a 45nm Phenom II in another machine just over the 4GHz mark. That required kicking up the CPU voltage to 1.6V, however. For the other two systems, AMD took out the big guns. One was strapped to a phase-change cooler and reached the mid-4GHz range at 1.7V, while the fastest system managed to break the 6GHz barrier using liquid nitrogen (which kept the core temperature down to a chilly -185°C).

Considering the latest leaked roadmaps suggest the fastest Phenom II launch CPU will run at 3GHz, those are pretty decent overclocks. We should note that AMD was using Crysis to test stability, however, and that only stresses a couple of cores at best.

 

[tim924]

Only couples of words I want to add is that do not take that seriously until something reliable to prove it to be valid,given AMD's recent reputation.Not only that the link doesnt even provide a solid screen shot with the performance they've achieved,just telling you
they have done that liberally is far from enough to make everyone believe.

 

[Loreena]

Wow so it encodes as fast as my stock Q9650 with retail cooler!

I can see it now...they measure SETI workunits per gram of dry ice. :laugh:

 

[JackyP]

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Unspossibles! THis may match i7 at 5.3 ghz!

I hate when these kinds of numbers drop before the important stuff.

Phenom was somewhat comparable to the C2Q, the biggest holdback for it was the the C2Q was able to overclock like mad. With the possibility that the phenom II overclocks like crazy, could be comparable to Penrynn in speed, and will possibly (most likely) be cheaper then intels offerings is good news.

Somewhat comparable? Yes 80% is somewhat comparable to 100%, still it was much slower - end of story.
No one cares about overclocking in terms of market size and money, so that surely wasn't the biggest holdback, stock clock, powerconsumption and performance was, but it's still lovely to see such a nice clocking chip from AMD.

Shanghai may be cheaper to the end user, but at the cost of margins. Shanghai's die is still at least 20% bigger than penryn, monolithic and using a new process. So the chip per se is not cheaper (i.e. cheaper to produce) at all.

 

[Concillian]

If they can maintain pricing similar to what they have now (signficantly less than intel) and have adequate performance in gaming, they have a win.

You don't gain much in terms of real-world gaming performance from C2Q at 3.2ish vs. 4.0GHz. 3.2ish has adequate framerates in pretty much any game. If you can get to that level for cheaper than what an intel platform costs, it saves you money or allows moving the budget around so you have more room for video cards, where most real gaming performance / quality gains come from.

Yeah, you see gaming gains from major overclocks, but I find that personally, I have a very difficult time noticing differences that have minimum frame rates over 30 FPS, and the reality is that if you set video quality settings appropriate for your video card, I haven't seen a game that can't achieve 30 FPS minimums from a mild OC on a C2D or C2Q, even Crysis.

What AMD needs to shoot for, and what I hope they are able to achieve, is a Q6600 killer, offering similar performance with 45nm power savings and overclockability, with AMD's usual pricing putting it at <$150-ish. It will take some time for it to get there, but that is what I see as the eventual market for Phenom II. i7 isn't going to fill this market until the mainstream socket, from what I've seen.

 

[Cogman]

Originally posted by: JackyP
Shanghai may be cheaper to the end user, but at the cost of margins. Shanghai's die is still at least 20% bigger than penryn, monolithic and using a new process. So the chip per se is not cheaper (i.e. cheaper to produce) at all.

80% Try 85-90% at the same clock speed, with a lower price (per cpu and whole system). I just ran the numbers, 77% was the absolute lowest it did, and it quite a few cases it was 95% of the speed of a Q6600 at the same clock speed (the 9700 that is).

Yes its slower, however you are paying less for it and the entire system. Does it cost AMD more to produce a CPU, probably, But I wasn't speaking about their benefits as the producer.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

So, if the IPC are close in comparison and its a choice between an i7 and a Phenom II, the Phenom II gets my choice.

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: masteryoda34
How can they run this chip with 1.9v. Wouldn't that kill it extremely fast?

Suicide run.

A demo put on for Journalists by AMD. Not all cores loaded.

Remeber the 3Ghz Phenom demo?

 

[BLaber]

Originally posted by: Phynaz

Suicide run.

A demo put on for Journalists by AMD. Not all cores loaded.

Remeber the 3Ghz Phenom demo?

Man don't you get tired of bashing AMD ever , every single post of yours in AMD thread is just bal bla bla AMD SUCKS..... Bla Bla ................. :disgust:

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: BLaber

Originally posted by: Phynaz

Suicide run.

A demo put on for Journalists by AMD. Not all cores loaded.

Remeber the 3Ghz Phenom demo?

Man don't you get tired of bashing AMD ever , every single post of yours in AMD thread is just bal bla bla AMD SUCKS..... Bla Bla ................. :disgust:

Where does he say AMD sucks in his post you just quoted? Oh, that's right. He didn't. I agree with him that the 6GHz run at 1.9v was a suicide run. In other words, they just wanted to see how high they could go and didn't care about burning up the chip. Suicide run.

At any rate, you'll have to wear some thicker skin for a bit longer, at least until AMD proves themselves competitive again with Deneb/Shanghai. So far, if these cores are not absolute maraschino cherries ( I think they just might be, don't you?), AMD is looking to get back into the game. Well see soon enough. I'm in the market for a new Deneb if my mobo supports it.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: BLaber

Originally posted by: Phynaz

Suicide run.

A demo put on for Journalists by AMD. Not all cores loaded.

Remeber the 3Ghz Phenom demo?

Man don't you get tired of bashing AMD ever , every single post of yours in AMD thread is just bal bla bla AMD SUCKS..... Bla Bla ................. :disgust:

Which part of that post is an AMD bash?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Legitreviews report the same thing

Apparently Macci (a legend amongst overclockers) was behind the overclocking event.

 

[BLaber]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: BLaber

Originally posted by: Phynaz

Suicide run.

A demo put on for Journalists by AMD. Not all cores loaded.

Remeber the 3Ghz Phenom demo?

Man don't you get tired of bashing AMD ever , every single post of yours in AMD thread is just bal bla bla AMD SUCKS..... Bla Bla ................. :disgust:

Which part of that post is an AMD bash?

First of all pardon me for my bad english , may be bash is not the correct word for what I wanted to tell or describe..

What I really don't like is consistent negative views as reply's in every AMD thread , Ive read from Phynaz , even if there is some really encouraging news about AMD.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: JackyP

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Unspossibles! THis may match i7 at 5.3 ghz!

I hate when these kinds of numbers drop before the important stuff.

Phenom was somewhat comparable to the C2Q, the biggest holdback for it was the the C2Q was able to overclock like mad. With the possibility that the phenom II overclocks like crazy, could be comparable to Penrynn in speed, and will possibly (most likely) be cheaper then intels offerings is good news.

Somewhat comparable? Yes 80% is somewhat comparable to 100%, still it was much slower - end of story.
No one cares about overclocking in terms of market size and money, so that surely wasn't the biggest holdback, stock clock, powerconsumption and performance was, but it's still lovely to see such a nice clocking chip from AMD.

Shanghai may be cheaper to the end user, but at the cost of margins. Shanghai's die is still at least 20% bigger than penryn, monolithic and using a new process. So the chip per se is not cheaper (i.e. cheaper to produce) at all.

I really think Phenom was more competitive then you give it credit for. The biggest problem with Phenom in my eyes was the performance you got for the amount of power it consumed. Intel really hit it out of the park with the C2D, it was almost always faster then Phenom, and did so using less power.

I don't know the die sizes off the top of my head, but my guess is a 45nm Denab isn't much bigger in size then two Penryns added togeter for the Intel quad.

Also, I think AMD has shown that they can have a pretty good product that isn't the absolute fastest but still fast enough so long as it's priced right. Take a look at the Radeon 4850/4870.